451 
18 B7 

>py 1 



SOME TYPES OF IRRIGATION 
FARMING IN UTAH 



A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE 

GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY 

OF MINNESOTA 

By 

EDGAR BERNARD BROSSARD, B. S.. M. S. 

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS 

FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR 

OF PHILOSOPHY 



June, 1920 






SOME TYPES OF IRRIGATION 
FARMING IN UTAH 



By 
E. B. BROSSARD 




BULLETIN NO. 177 



Utah Agricultural College 

EXPERIMENT STATION 



Logan, Utah 



December, 1920 



UTAH AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT 
STATION 

BOARD OF TRUSTEES 

A. W. IVINS Salt Lake City 

JOHN DERN Salt Lake City 

LORENZO N. STOHL Salt Lake City 

JOHN C. SHARP Salt Lake Citv 

ANGUS T. WRIGHT Ogden 

GEORGE T. ODELL Salt Lake City 

A. G. BARBER Logan 

LOIS C. HAYBALL Logan 

FRANK B. STEPHENS Salt Lake Citv 

JOHN D. PETERS. Brigham Citv 

W. S. HANSEN ...Fielding 

GEORGE W. SKIDMORE Logan 

HARDEN BENNION, Secretary of State. (Ex-officio) Salt Lake City 

Ol<l<ICERS OF THE BOARD 

A. W. IVINS President 

JOHN DERN Vice-President 

JOHN L. COBURN Secretary and Treasurer 

EXPERIMENT STATION STAFF 
E. G. PETERSON, Ph. D., President of the College 

F. S. HARRIS, Ph. D., Director and Agronomist 

WM. PETERSON, B. S., Geologist 

H. J. FREDERICK, D. V. M., ..Veterinarian 

F. L. WEST, Ph. D., Physicist 

J. E. GREAVES, Ph. D., Chemist and Bacteriologist 

W. E. CARROLL, Ph. D., Animal Husbandman 

BYRON ALDER, B. S., ; Poultryman 

GEORGE R. HILL, JR., Ph. D., Botanist 

O. W. ISRAELSEN, M. S., Irrigation and Drainage Engineer 

M. C. MERRILL, Ph. D Horticulturist 

D. S. JENNINGS, Ph. D., Soil Survey 

R. J. BECRAFT, B. S., Range Management 

GEORGE STEWART, M. S Field Crops 

R. L. HILL, Ph. D., Human Nutrition 

E. B. BROSSARD, Ph. D., Farm Management 

GEORGE B. CAINE, M. A., Dairying 

C. T. HIRST, M. S., Associate Chemist 

VVILLARD GARDNER, Ph. D., Associate Physicist 

B. L. RICHARDS, Ph. D Associate Botanist 

BLANCHE COOPER, B. S Associate in Human Nutrition 

EZRA G. CARTER, M. S., Associate Bacteriologist 

M. D. THOMAS, B. S., B. Sc., Associate Agronomist 

D. W. PITTMAN, M. S., Assistant Agronomist 

T. H. ABELL, M. S., Assistant Horticulturist 

A. F. BRACKEN. B. S Assistant .Agronomist 

YEPPA LUND, M. S., Assistant in Chemistry and Bacteriology 

L. F. NUFFER, B. S., Assistant Botanist 

ARTHUR FIFE, B. S Assistant in Irrigation 

N. E. EDLEFSEN, B. S., Assistant Physicist 

SCOTT EWING, B. S., Assistant Physicist 

G. E. KING, B. S Assistant Entomologist 

A. L. WILSON, B. S., Superintendent Davis County Farm 

PETER NELSON, B. S., Farm Superintendent 

J. R. BATEMAN, B. S.,... Superintendent Panguitch Farm 

HERBERT J. PACK, B. S., Assistant Entomologist 

BLANCHE CONDIT PITTMAN, A. B Clerk and Librarian 

Is.. B. SAULS. B. S., Secretary to the Director 

IX CHARGE OF CO-OPERATIVE INVESTIGATIONS WITH 
U. S. DEPARTMEN T OF AG RICULTURE 

Irrigation Engineer 



L. M. WINSOR. B. S 






CONTENTS 

Page 

Table of Contents 2 

Introduction 3 

Meaning of Type of Farming 3 

The Ideal Type of Farming 3 

Competition of Types of. Farming 3 

Purpose of this Investigation .-. 5 

Collection and Preparation of Data 5 

Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah 6 

Location 6 

Elevation 6 

Crops 6 

Pasture 9 

Dry-farm Wheat vs. Barley 9 

Hay : 9 

Alfalfa vs. Sugar-beets 10 

Oats vs. Spring Wheat 10 

Sugar-beets vs. Potatoes 10 

Livestock 12 

Summary of Crops and Stock 15 

Diversity and Balance of Farm Business 15 

Size of Farm Business , 17 

Farm Machinery 18 

Buildings 19 

Climate 20 

Topography 20 

Soil 24 

National Forests and Public Stock Ranges 25 

Population 26 

The Farm Family '. 29 

Farm Labor 32 

Markets 37 

Wagon and Auto Roads and Railroads..... 38 

Land Tenure 38 

Land Values 42 

Water Tenure 45 

Irrigation Practice 49 

Quantity of Irrigation Water to Use 50 

When to Irrigate 51 

Farm Credit 52 

Farm Profits 55 

Summary 63 

Beaver, Beaver County, Utah 64 

Monroe, Sevier County, Utah 68 

Sandy, Salt Lake County, Utah 70 

Ferron, Emery County, Utah 73 

Wellington, Carbon County, Utah 75 

Hinckley, Millard County, Utah 76 

Pleasant Grove, Utah County, Utah 78 

General Summary 81 

Acknowledgements 96 

Appendix 97 

Index 135 

Illustrations in Text 135 

Tables in Text 136 

Tables in Appendix 138 

Biographical 140 



ERRATA 

Page 16, Table VII, "Receipts'' from "Livestock" should be $7 82 in- 
stead of $798. 

Page 55, Table XXXVI, "Expenses" should be $882 instead of 
?1,882. 

Page 57, Table XXXVIII, under "Farm Capital'', "Machinery" 
value should be $531 instead of $542. 

Page 58, Table XXXIX, Miscellaneous receipts on the 10 better- 
paying farms should be $314 instead of $413. 

Page 59, Table XL, under "Farm Capital", value of buildings on 
10 better-paying farms should be $1,448 instead of $1,14 8, the value of 
livestock on the average of all 32 farms should be $1,584 instead of 
$1,534 and the total farm capital on the average of all 32 farms should 
be $12,057 instead of $12,056. The farm income on the 10 better-pay- 
ing farms should be $2,855 instead of $2,885 and Labor income should 
be $1,730 instead of $1,760. 

Page 98, Table II, "Crop Acres per Man", on the 10 better-paying 
farms should be 42 instead of 14. 



SOME TYPES OF IRRIGATION FARMING IN UTAH( ) 



By 

E. B. BROSSARD 



Meaning of Type of Farming. — As ordinarily used "type of farm- 
ing'' suggests general contrasts in the nature of farm business. The 
bases used in making these contrasts are: ,(1) sources of farm income, 
(2) number of farm enterprises, (3) amount of labor, capital, and 
management applied to each acre of land, and (4) farm practice with 
reference to maintenance of soil fertility. When based on sources of 
farm income, farms are classified as grain farms, hay farms, fruit farms, 
dairy farms, etc., according to the proportionate magnitude of the in- 
come from the different sources. When the number of farm enterprises 
is used as the basis, farms are classified as specialized or diversified. 
When the amount of labor, capital, and management applied to the acre 
oi land is used as the basis, farming is said to be either extensive or 
intensive. AVhen the farm practice of fertility maintenance is used as 
the basis of comparison, farming is either exploitive or conservative. 
These contrasts, tho arbitrary and general, are valuable in suggesting 
the extremes of farming types. In this study, not only the extremes are 
noted, but some small differences and similarities in the combination 
and inter-relations of the farm enterprises are pointed out. Amounts 
and kinds of crops and livestock raised, purchased, and sold are im- 
portant as are also the amounts and combinations of machinery, build- 
ings, land, water, labor, and management. Therefore, "type of farm- 
ing", as used here means kind of farming, and in order to describe the 
kinds of farming practised in these areas in Utah, more detail is given 
than is ordinarily suggested by the phrase "type of farming." 

The Ideal Type of Farming. — The ideal type of farming for any 
community at any one time is that which combines crops, livestock, 
machinery, buildings, land, water, labor, and management of such kinds 
and grades, and in such amounts, numbers and proportions, and in such 
ways as to yield the highest longtime average net returns for each unit 
of management or for each manager. 

It is perfectly obvious that the farmer is not an independent, isolat- 
ed individual, but a cooperating member of society. The farmer's 
business is not an independent one, but in these days of commercial 
agriculture, is dependent to a great extent upon the nation and society. 
Each farmer is a member of the present system of "Individual Ex- 
change-Cooperation" (••;) and all of the cooperating parties are entitled 
to consideration as factors in determining the ideal type of farming. 
There are cases where the immediate interests of the farmer are not in 
harmony with the best interests of the nation and society generally. 

The fact that the farmer is a member of our competitive society 
must not be overlooked. The farmer desires to obtain as much for his 
wages of labor, wages of management, and pay for risk or responsibil- 
ity taken, as he can get legitimately. In other words the farmer wishes 
the largest profits possible. In so far as the acts of the individual 
farmer, in seeking the largest possible profits from his enterprises, are 
in harmony with the best interests of the nation and society generally, 
it is to the advantage of the nation and society to permit him to attain 
his ambition. 

Competition of Type.s of Farming. — Since so many conflicting 
factors contribute to the establishment of farming practice that no one 

(i)Presented as a thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for 
the doctors degree fPh. D.) at the University of Minnesota. 

(-)Taylor, F. M.. and Adams, E. C, Prin. of Econ. (1918), p. 12, 
Fifth Ed., Ann Arbor, Mich. 



4 Bulletin No. 177 

can hope to give proper consideration to all of them, it is impossible 
to tell the best type of farming for a given region without its being 
tried. In this study only the most conspicuous factors are considered. 
Th« effects of individual factors and sets of factors are different in dif- 
ferent districts. The effects of similar factors often vary even for two 
adjoining farms. 

It is likely that the types of farming practised in the areas investi- 
gated are, in general, the best since they are the results of fifty or more 
years of experience of the farmers of these areas. A half century ago 
these farmers, or their predecessors, obtained certain definite lands with 
given natural and economic conditions. As a result of their combined 
experiences, with the various crop and livestock enterprises, they were. 
in 1914, 1915, and 1916, following the practices described in this 
thesis. 

Perhaps the chief factors in determining the type of farming in any 
region are the natural factors such as (1) climate, (2) soil, and (3) 
topography; but the economic factors of (1) demand, (2) supply, and 
(3) transportation, often established a type of farming in a community 
in spite of natural advantages and disadvantages. 

The usual condition is not a given farmer seeking a certain sort of 
farm, but a particular farmer on a given farm desiring to know the 
proper type of farming. The important thing, therefore, is to learn of 
as many factors as possible,^ — if not of all the factors, — that influence 
particular types in individual areas, and to analyze their effects. 

The fact that the elements that determine type are subject to fre- 
quent change makes the proper balancing of them difficult. The suc- 
cessful farmer must be keen, alert, progressive and use good business 
judgment if he is to keep up-to-date in his type of farming. New 
things are constantly being tried by one or more farmers. They should 
be generally adopted only when it is reasonably sure that their adoption 
will make the farm enterprise as a unit pay better than it does with 
present practices. Nothing but experience can prove a type of farming 
best for a given farmer and a given farm, and even after a successful 
year with a given type, a farmer is rarely sure that his type is the best. 
He frequently wonders if he would not have done better had he followed 
another type, and no individual will be able to give him a positive 
answer either in the negative or affirmative, because of the innumerable 
variables that affect the solution of the problem. But a study of the 
apparent factors may be suggestive. Because of these frequent changes 
in the economic conditions of a community, the type of farming must 
change and accommodate itself to the new conditions. Present prac- 
tices have evolved slowly. Often ten, twenty, or thirty years go by 
before the best type is generally adopted by the farmers of a community. 
Some of the reasons why this is so are as follows: (1) the farm build- 
ings are adjusted to the present type and changes are costly, (2) the 
machinery may require replacement by that more suitable to the new 
type. (3) city warehouses may be made useless, (4) credit may be 
hard to get, (5) markets for the products to be abandoned may be well 
established causing difficulty in changing to the new type, (6) the 
farmers and the public may lack knowledge concerning the new type, 
(7) the diflSiculty of distinguishing a temporary overproduction from 
conditions that call for the abandonment of a crop or stock enterprise 
operates against rapid changes, and (8) the natural conservatism of 
farmers keeps them from making the changes hurriedly. Types of 
farmers are often more persistent than types of farming. 

It is evident that the best type of farming for a community this year 
may not be the best a few years from now. It is likely that before the 
majority of farmers have adopted the first readjustments they find it 
necessary to begin a second series. Sometimes a type pays so well or so 
poorly in a community that it is readily adopted or rejected by a major- 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



ity of farmers. More often, however, there are several or many com- 
peting types in each community and slight variations in the conditions 
cause gradual changes in type. It is in the interrelations of all the 
factors both natural and economic that the type of farming is determined, 
and as a rule the type practised is not far from what it should be. 

Purpose of this Investisation. — Technically trained agriculturists 
have studied carefully many of the natural or physical factors of agri- 
cultural production. Some of the economic factors have also been 
analyzed and correlated. But not all of the interrelations of these 
factors and their effects on type of farming are generally understood. 
It is for the purpose of showing some of these interrelations and their 
effects on type of farming that this investigation is undertaken. 

Collection and Preparation of Data. — Liberal use has been made 
of published and otherwise available material compiled by others, as is 

shown thruout the thesis by " the 
numerous references. The data for 
the original investigation were col- 
lected by the writer and assistants, 
during the years 1914, 1915. and 
1916, while he was in the employ of 
the United States Department of 
Agriculture and the Utah Agricul- 
tural College. The work was done 
in cooperation with the County Agri- 
cultural Agents and the Farm 
Bureaus of the respective counties in 
which the areas are located. 

Tlie areas investigated were chosen 
because they are representative of 
various types of irrigation-farming 
and of varied natural and economic 
conditions in irrigated areas in 
the Rocky Mountain States. Each 
area is discussed separately. Aver- 
ages are usually used as the basis of 
analysis, 
•eas Some farms were dropped from the 

investigation after 1914 and 1915 
respectively and other farms were 
added to the groups after 1914 and 1915 respectively. Only part of the 
farms have been cooperating the three years. This does not, however, 
impair the accuracy of the data for this investigation, since it is not its 
purpose to show the evolution of agriculture on the individual farms 
during this period, but rather the types of farming practised on these 
irrigated farms and the reasons for such types. 

The data presented here have been calculated from records of farm 
business which were obtained by the Survey Method (i). The smallest 
number of records obtained at any one place was at Wellington. Car- 
bon County, 1914, where only 26 were taken. The most taken was in 
the Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, 1914, where 72 were obtained. (See 
Table I.) 

In the following areas, records were obtained for the three consecu- 
tive years, 1914, 1915, and 1916, for the farm business year beginning 
January 1: (1) Beaver, Beaver County; (2) Hyde Park, Cache County; 

(i)Warren, G. F., Cornell University, Buls. No. 295, (March. 1911). 
No. .334. No. 344, (April, 1914") ; Spillman, W. J., U. S. D. A., Professional 
Paper, Bui. No. 529, (April, 1917); Thompson, E. H., U. S. D. A., Farm- 
ers' Bui. No. 6 61, (April, 1915). 




Fig. 



1. — Location of the 8 
investigated, Utah. 



6 Bulletm No. 177 

Table I. — Number of Farm Records Studied Each Year 
by Counties, Utah. 

Year | Beaver | Cache ] Carbon ! Emery ; Millard j Salt Lake | Sevier | Utah | Total 



1914 


1 50 


52 1 


26 


39 


59 1 


72 


63 




361 


1915 


1 40 


48 1 




48 


60 1 


47 


38 




281 


1916 


1 44 


32 1 




34 


39 1 


45 


1 57 


57 


308 



Total \ 134 I 132 | 26 | 121 | 158 | 164 | 158 | 57 | 950 

(3) Ferron, Emery County; (4) Hinckley, Millard County; (5) Sandy, 
Salt Lake County; and ,(6) Monroe, Sevier County. (See Table II). 

Table II. — Number of Farm Records by Length of Record 
for each County, Utah 

Number of Farm Records for Each County 



Year 


1 Beaver Cache Carbon | Emery | Millard | Salt Lake | Sevier 


Total 


1914 


1 50 


52 1 


26 1 39 1 59 


72 


j 63 


361 


1914 & 1915 


1 30 


32 


25 34 


48 


35 


204 


1914, 1915 














and 1916 


30 


32 


1 25 1 34 


15 


35 


171 



For the years 1914 and 1915, the center of the Sandy Area was Sandy, 
but in 1916 most of the records were taken at Draper, which is the 
township south of Sandy. The Wellington, Carbon County records were 
taken for 1914 only, and the Pleasant Grove, Utah County records 
were taken for 1916 only. 

A study of the type of farming in any area has the five following 
phases: (1) enumeration and description of the individual crop and 
stock enterprises, (2j determination of the magnitude and importance 
of each separate enterprise, (3) determination of the combinations of 
tne enterprises, (4) determination of the proportions in which the en- 
terprises are combined, and (5) analysis of the factors affecting the 
choice of the enterprises and their combinations. As far as practicable, 
in this study, the descriptive part is given first and the analytical part 
subsequently. The Hyde Park area is treated in detail and the other 
seven areas only briefly. 

HYDE PARK, CACHE COUNTY, UTAH 

Location. — Hyde Park town is in Cache County, in the North Cent- 
ral part of the State of Utah. It is situated on the east side of Cache 
Valley at the western base of the Bear River Range of mountains. It 
is five miles north from the center of Logan, which had a population of 
7,522 in 1910 (i), and is four miles south from Smithfield, which in 
1910 had a population of 1,86 5. It is four and one-half miles north 
trom the Utah Agricultural College. ( See Figure 1). 

Elevation. — The elevation is about 4,507 feet above mean sea level. 

Crops. — Table XXX in the appendix shows the total area of the 32 
Hyde Park farms and the use to which each acre was put in 1914, 1915, 
and 1916 respectively. It thus shows the kind and importance of the 
crops grown based on the acreage harvested. There has been a slight 
increase during the three year period in the acreage of winter wheat 
grown, for two reasons: first, the price of wheat has increased more 
than the price of the other crops; and, second, dry-farming has been 
extended to land that formerly has been used only as grazing land. 
Otherwise the changes in land ownership and operation and in the 

(1)1910 U. S. Census. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



> > 

c g> 






































^ 




II 


1— 1 


e 


^ M ►t) O 


^'2 o o S 


^ 




-0 


SI 


O 
in 




o 
o 


3 

a. 

p 

o 


III 


1! 


c 3 

CD ; 


& ^ o 


B 
> 


5 














o 
O 




^ 








1 








P"; g 




















(D 




























; ; i ; ; . i-j ; ; 




f? : ' ■ 








_ 








,_. 




bS h-i M to M CO to 


1— ' M M 


CO to CO 


h-i CO CA3 • 


«5 




^t_l4i.t««>-JOObS 


00 o o o 


to 00 00 to 


CO HI to to 


1^ 














— 


. 









— 


B 
















• 


1-1 


CO 


^ h-i M to M InS CO 


M ^1 


CO CO CO 


CO CO 


CO 


^ 


^H'-J'^-tOOIW-JtC 


-0 -J o o 


bO -J o to 


en cc to to 


'"' 










cn 


■o 






— 











■ 


o 


















HI 


?. 


M 1-1 to to I-' to CO 


; M 1-1 


: : : CO 


1-1 to to 


«o 





C004^0«>OOiOtO 


; en to to 


; ; ; to 


*. HI to to 


HI 
Oi 


cn 










■|_i 










*-" 


^ 


2 


t-i I-* CO 
r^OC04^O4>.t>SC000 


CO tn oi *^ 


h-* ^ en 
CO CO h-i <X> 


Ci -0 to cn 


it^ 










l_i 


Cf!) 








1—1 


«> 


CD 


l-i CO 


1-1 M CO 


)-i CO on 


(-1 1-1 «0 HI 


HI 




h-iococoo^^-to-a 


-J CO -J -J 


C5 -3 «> -J 


to 1-1 on ?o 


cn 


> 


1 " 








^ 


i 








1—1 


W 


^^ 


t-* CO 


: I-" ! 


; : : cn 


H-i h-i O M 


M 


^ 


OOtOtOCDCOtO*>-tO 


; H-i 00 ; 


: ; ; I-' 


O 05 to «5 


OS 


CO 










>. 


to 








1-1 


< ^ 


05 


1— ' CO 


1-1 1-1 CO 


H-i *^ c;i 


h-i CC HI 


2 "^ 


B 


MOC0C0O*>.C0C005 


tn CO -J Cf5 


4i. en o C5 


<r> en 4>. 00 


p 2 




3 ^ 


333 




?§- 


Oi 












> 










HI 


< 




1—1 




M 


CO 


o 


H-1 H-l l-> l-l CO 


en ^ CJi o 


en *. en 


era en !X> HI 


HI 




totooscni-'^ooo^oo 


to -J o o 


to to -a o 


en o to en 


4^ 


1 

fD 










HI 


> 




1-1 




HI 


eo 


O 


h-i H" to l-» l-i W 


^ 1-1 en H-i 


~a *. en 


~a CO <as H* 


HI 


>-! 


h-'Cnoi*«-Orf».OCn-J 


OO 4^ >f>. 00 


05 00 to ^ 


«0 «) OS to 


en 


03 









^ 


iO 


f 


1-' l-i CO 


41. ; 


; ; ; w 


oo .^ cr> HI 




»53 


\-^ : e;irf».ooooocnto 


: 05 00 ; 


: : : t-i 


H' en CO o 


Oi 


p 

i 


— . 






~ 














01 




^ 




M 


&„ 


5S 


^ 1-1 |_J H-l CO 


Oj 1-1 en h-i 


C5 .^ tn 


-J *. «) HI 


2 << 


^ 


M^cn*.o-qcr>cno5 


tn to 1-1 4*. 


^ en 4>. OS 


Oi cn 4». 00 


ss 


o 1 


^^ 


-^ ,— V 


.^ , — . '--. 




^ 


^ w 


^^^ 




» -^ 


5' 1 








































cm 1 



Bulletin No. 177 



acreages of the various crops grown are not marked enough nor regular 
enough to illustrate anything but a satisfactory and stable condition. 
No radical changes have taken place in the three-year period of this 
investigation. It is true that the prices of farm products changed dur- 
ing the period, but the type of farming has not changed greatly. The 
prices of most of the farm products grown here have increased normally. 
The respective crop ratios have not changed much. 

Table III shows the tenure and use of farm land. The 32 farms 
have an average area of 118 acres, 94 of which are owned by the oper- 
ator, 15 cash rented, and 9 share rented. There were 56 acres of crops 
harvested on the average, 36 of which were irrigated crops and the 
remaining 20 acres of which were dry-farm crops. The remaining land 
was used about as follows: 40 acres for pasture, 15 acres for summer 
fallow, and 4 acres in farmstead, roads, and waste. 

The recording of the pasture, summer fallow, and waste land in 1916 
was not done satisfactorily and therefore is omitted. Because of this 
fact the three-year average area does not check, but it is nevertheless 
sufficiently accurate for the present purpose. 

Of the dry-farm land, 17 acres were in winter wheat, 3 acres in 
barley, and 15 or 16 summer fallowed. The 36 crop acres of irrigated 
land were cropped as follows: (1) hay, 20 acres divided as follows: 
alfalfa, 13 acres, timothy and clover, 3 acres, and wild hay and oat hay, 
4 acres; (2) sugar-geets, 9 acres; (3) oats, 3 acres; (4) spring wheat, 
3 acres; and (5) potatoes, 1 acre. 

That these crops are grown successfully is shown by the average 
yields as given in Table IV. 

Table IV. — Crop Yields on Hyde Park Farms, 1914, 1915, and 1916 



Crop 



Alfalfa 

Other Hay.. 
Sugar-beets 



Oats 

Irrigated Wheat.. 
Dry-farm Wheat. 
Dry-farm Barley. 
Irrigated Barley.. 
Potatoes 



Average Acre-Yields 



Tons 
4 
2.6 

18.6 

Bu. 
70 
31 
271 
281 
281 

178 



« o 



1915 



Tons Tons I Tons| Tons| Tons 



3.8 

2.4 
18.6 
Bu. 

69 I 
32 1 
24 I 
24i| 
24i| 
188 j 



3.6 

I 2.4 
I 18.6 
1 Bu. 

I 241 

I 241 

I 231 

231 

205 



3.4 

2.2 I 2.2 
16.5 I 16.6 
Bu 



3.5 I 3.4 



Bu 

64 I 
44 I 
21 I 
13ii 

13i| 

52 I 



2.1 

18.0 

Bu. 

63 

36 

19 

8 

60 

36 



Tons I 
2.7 I 
2.0 I 

15.2 I 

Bu. I 
58 I 
34 I 
18 I 
25i| 
25i| 

172 I 



Tons 
2.9 
1.8 

15.6 

Bu. 
83 
32 
20 
261 
261 

160 



The low yield of potatoes in 1915 was due largely to the plant dis- 
eases, Fusarium Wilt and Rhizoctonia. All yields except that for spring 
wh'eat were lower in 1915 than in 1914. The yields for all crops except 



(1) Includes that grown on both the dry-farm and irrigated land. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 9 

oats and barley were lower in 1916 than in either 1915 or 1914. This 
was due mainly to less favorable climatic conditions(i) and to plant 
diseases. However, the yields in 1916 are good compared with the 
average for the State and the country as a whole. 

The average yield of hay, potatoes, corn, winter wheat, spring 
wheat, oats, and barley in Utah is 184 per cent of the average yield of 
the United States and is 174 per cent of the avei-age yield of the State 
of Iowa. (See Tables XXXVIII, XXXIX and XL in Appendix.) 

Pasture. — Table III shows that there are about 40 acres of pasture per 
farm. Almost all of this is permanent pasture. Most of it is on the wet 
clay-land west of the State road. The greater part of this land west of 
the State road is used for pasture or meadow. Whether it is pastured or 
cut for hay is largely a question of need of hay or pasture. Some of this 
land is cut for hay some years and pastured others. However, much of the 
land pastured cannot be cut for hay at all until it is drained. It would 
not pay to cut for hay some of the higher ground in the fields, unless they 
were leveled and irrigated, as the yield of hay would be too low. Usually, 
therefore, this land is either in permanent pasture or permanent meadow 
depending on the soil, topography, possibilities of irrigation, and need of 
either hay or pasture, on the particular farm. It would not pay to culti- 
vate this land in its present condition. 

Some of the permanent pasture land is on the foot-hills and mountains. 
This land has no other use to which it might be put. If it was not pas- 
tured or grazed it would have no agricultural value at all. 

Some of the dry-stock of the dairy herds and most of the meat cattle 
are grazed on the Cache National Forest. This reduces the number of 
acres of farm pasture necessary to furnish summer feed for stock. 

It is largely on account of these pasture conditions at Hyde Park that 
the dairy industry has developed to its present importance and that the 
sales of cattle amount to as much as they do. 

Dry-farm AVheat vs. Barley. — Two important questions concerning dry- 
farm wheat and barley are: (1) Why are wheat and barley grown on the 
dry-farm lands? and, (2) Why does each have its present importance? 
The answers involve a number of factors, some of which are as follows: 
( 1 ) wheat and barley are grown because they are the two most successful 
dry-farm crops (-), (2) wheat is grown as a cash crop, (3) the yields are 
usually slightly greater for wheat than for barley (s), (4) the price is 
generally considerably higher for wheat than for barley (■»), (5) the cost 
of production is practically the same for wheat as for barley(s), and (6) 
barley is more difficult and disagreeable to handle. 

The question then arises as to why any barley at all is grown. Why is 
not all the land planted to wheat? There are three good reasons for 
planting some barley. (1) Barley is used as feed. (2) A better distri- 
bution of labor is obtained by growing both barley and wheat than by 
growing only wheat. When the feed or labor situation dictates the plant- 
ing of barley or some less profitable crop or no crop, barley is chosen, 
(3) Alternate cropping of wheat and barley may increase the yield, as 
barley is a more shallow rooted crop than wheat. 

Hay. — Table III shows that on the 32 farms an average of about 20 
acres of hay are grown, of which 13 acres are alfalfa, 3 acres are timothy 

(i)U. S. D. A., Weather Bureau Reports. 

(^)Widtsoe, J. A., Dry Farming — Text, (1911) pp. 234-243, McMillan 
Company. 

(3)See Table IV. Crop Yields on Hyde Park Farms, 1914, 1915, 
and 1916. 

(4) See Table XXIX. Farm Prices of some Utah Farm Products, Ap- 
pendix. 

(5)Peck, F. W., Minn. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui". No. 179, (Nov. 1918), pp. 
27-29. 



10 Bulletin No. 177 

f.nd timothy and clover, and 4 acres are wild hay and oat hay. Oat hay 
is cut only in emergencies and the amount is negligible. Wild hay is 
grown on land that at present is too low and wet for cultivation. Some 
of it is wet naturally, but some is made too wet for cultivation by irriga- 
tion of the higher land nearer the mountains. The timothy and timothy 
and clover are grown largely for horse feed. As a rule it is grown on land 
that would grow alfalfa but occasionally timothy and clover seed are sown 
on land that is slightly too wet for alfalfa. Some timothy and clover is 
also raised in crop rotation instead of alfalfa because sugar-beets are more 
easily handled on this than on alfalfa sod. 

Alfalfa is the main hay crop and constitutes about 65 per cent of the 
total hay acreage. On suitable land so situated as to be irrigable, alfalfa 
has no near rival when grown for feed for dairy cows or other cattle. Its 
feeding value and its high yields make it king of the irrigated feed crops. 

But now the question arises as to why these farmers grow on the 
average 13-15 acres of alfalfa and 9 or 10 acres of sugar-beets when much 
of the land that grows alfalfa might be planted to sugar-beets or vice 
versa. 

Alfalfa vs. Sugar-beets. — Sugar-beets are usually grown on the best 
piece of land on the farm. From 4 to 6 times as much labor is put on 
each acre of sugar-beets as on an acre of alfalfa. For this reason it would 
be unwise to plant beets on inferior land. The reasons why 10 acres of 
beets are grown are given later. But why grow 13 to 15 acres of alfalfa? 
The farm family wants to make as much as possible out of the farm. To 
grow alfalfa for livestock that may be pastured in summer, and- fed in 
winter, with a fairly good market for dairy products existing, gives a 
better labor distribution, makes it possible to do some productive work in 
winter, and saves paying out an excessive amount for wages for hired 
help in summer, and therefore nets a greater income, than planting sugar- 
beets on all of the good arable irrigated land. The present acreage of 
alfalfa is sufficient, when the other hay is added to it, to feed the stock 
inventoried and in normal years a small surplus is feold. In abnormally 
poor hay years, or years when excessive amounts of feed are required, the 
hay is all fed in the district. 

Oats vs. Spring AVlieat. — Table III shows that on the average 3 to 4 
acres of oats and 3 to 5 acres of spring wheat are grown on the farms at 
Hyde Park. These crops are non-competing. Growing both gives a 
better distribution of labor than growing either one to the exclusion of 
the other. Oats are grown mainly for horse feed. Four acres at 65 
bushels to the acre gives a total yield of 2 60 bushels for an average of 4 
work horses or 65 bushels of oats each year for each horse. Not all of 
these oats are fed to horses, however, as some are also fed to cows in the 
district, and a few are shipped out of the district. 

The spring wheat is grown as a cash crop on irrigated land. It is 
sometimes alternated with cats and sometimes it is seeded on alfalfa sod 
the year before sugar-beets are planted. Alternating wheat and oats 
gives greater yields; and the planting of wheat on alfalfa sod allows the 
alfalfa roots and crowns to largely decompose, which facilitates beet cul- 
ture the following year. 

Sugar-beets vs. Potatoes. — Sugar-beets and potatoes are crops that 
compete for capital, labor, management, and irrigated land. The question 
arises as to why they are grown in the present proportions. Why is it, 
that on the farms reporting these two crops, 9 to 10 acres of sugar-beets 
and less than 1 acre of potatoes are grown? The answer divides naturally 
into several parts. The 10 to 11 acres of sugar-beets and potatoes are 
grown instead of more acres of these crops largely because, the farm 
family is the basic unit, around which the farm business is organized, and 
10 or 11 acres of these comparatively intensive crops are about all that 
the average farm family can handle without hiring excessive amounts of 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



11 



labor during rush seasons. Some of the reasons why 9 or 10 acres are 
devoted to sugar-beets and only 1 or less to potatoes are brought out In 
the following pages. 

Table V shows that the average acre-value of sugar-beets for the 
i.hree years, 1914, 1915, and 1916, was $79, and for potatoes $77, or 
but $2 higher for sugar-beets than for potatoes, or 3 per cent of the 
average acre-value of potatoes grown. 

Table V. — Yield, Price, and Acre-Value of Sugar-beets and Potatoes, 
1914, 1915, and 1916, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah 





No. 

Farms 

Report 

ing 


Average 


Average Acre- 
Value of Total 
Product 


Year 


Acre 


-Yield 


Unit-Price 




Sugar- 
beets 


1 Pota- 
i toes 


Sugar- ! Pota- 
beets 1 toes 


Sugar- 1 Pota- 
beets i toes 


1914 .. 

1915 .. 

1916 - 


52 
48 
32 


18.6 T. 
16.5 T. 
15.2 T. 


178- Bu.j 

56 Bu.| 

172 Bu.l 


$4.50 $ .43 
4.75 .50 
5.50 1 .74 


$84 1 $77 . 
78 1 28 
74 1 127 



Average for the three years. 



.| $79 I $77 



Some of the potatoes were stored and sold in the spring while all of 
the sugar-beets were marketed directly from the fields in the fall. 

In 1914 the average acre-yield of potatoes was 17 8 bushels. The 
average price of those sold was 43 cents a bushel. The total value of 
the product of an acre was, therefore, $77.- The average acre-yield of 
sugar-beets was 18.6 tons. The average price received for a ton was 
$4.50. Thus the acre-value of the product was $84 or $7 more than for 
potatoes. 

Seed potatoes cost about $5 to $8 an acre, or $3 to $5 more for each 
acre than sugar-beet seed, which cost $2.25 an acre in 1914. In areas 
comewhat similar to the Hyde Park district, the total cost of producing 
a ton of beets in 1914 and 1915, where the acre-yield was 16 tons or 
over, varied from $3.93 to $4.12 (i). The net returns, including tops, 
varied from $6.85 to $9.23 an acre(i). 

The total water requirements for the two crops are about the same, 
but the best times for applications differ. The irrigating of sugar-beets 
is not such a precise task as irrigating potatoes. 

The labor requirements for potatoes are about 114 man hours iand 
115 horse hours an acre annually (-') . The labor requirements tor 
sugar-beets are about 143 man hours and 142 horse hours an acre 
annually(2) (3). Sugar-beets require about 26 per cent more man labor 
and 23 per cent more horse labor than potatoes. From 54.4 to 56.3 per 
cent of the total cost of producing sugar-beets is labor cost(3). The 
harvesting of beets requires about the same amount of labor as harvest- 
ing potatoes and both crops are harvested at about the same time of the 
vear. The labor in the other periods is also competitive but more labor 
is required each period for sugar-beets than for potatoes. 

(i)Moorhouse, L. A., and others, U. S. D. A. Bui. No. 693, (July, 
1918), p. 41. 

(2)Connor, L. G., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 165. (Oct., 1918), 
Tables 15 and 6, p. 20. 

(^)Moorhouse, L. A., and others, U. S. D. A. Farm Mgt. Bui. No. 
C93, (July, 1918), p. 42, gives the annual labor requirements for an 
acre of sugar-beets as from 119.4 to 133.3 man hours and 79.3 to 117.14 
horse hours. 



12 Bulletin No. 177 

The $2 excess in acre-value of product of sugar-beets over potatoes 
is only 6-2/3 cents an hour for the 30 additional man hours required to 
produce each acre of beets. 

These facts seem to indicate that if all labor was hired the potato 
crop would be much more popular in comparison with sugai'-beets. The 
great amount of unpaid family labor at Hyde Park makes it more 
profitable to raise sugar-beets than potatoes because in raising beets the 
annual net returns for this labor is slightly greater. This indicates that 
the farm family is the basic unit of production and not alone the farmer 
or head of the family. 

The rather heavy compact soil at Hyde Park is generally better 
adapted to sugar-beet tnan potato culture. 

Another reason why sugar-beets are grown instead of potatoes is 
that there is but a limited local market for potatoes. The products must 
compete in distant markets. Beets are manufactured into sugar. This 
rinal product is a much more concentrated (less bulky) product than 
potatoes and can thus compete more favorably in distant markets than 
can potatoes. This fact has made it possible for the sugar manufac- 
turers to pay a price for beets sufficient to induce farmers to grow them 
instead . of growing potatoes. 

The factories do not necessarily have to pay sufficiently high prices 
for the beets to make growing them as profitable to the farmer as the 
potato crop, because by their method of contracting for the beets they 
relieve the farmers of the risk of loss from low prices. Before the 
farmer plants his sugar-beet seed he knows what price he will get for 
each ton of his product marketed in the fall. The farmers contract with 
the sugar companies to raise a certain acreage of beets", and for each 
ton marketed in the fall they receive a contract price. This almost 
assures the farmer a profit from raising beets unless the year is so ab- 
normal as to cause a crop failure. In raising potatoes the farmer takes 
the risk of low prices as well as that of crop failure. The sugar manu- 
facturing companies have had the advantage of all increase in the price 
cf sugar and have borne the risk of a decreased price. These companies, 
however, are more able to take this risk in speculating than the farmers 
and the majority of farmers are glad to have them do it, as farming is 
thus made more stable. Consequently farmers are usually willing to 
allow the sugar companies a reasonable remuneration for this service. 

The question that now naturally arises is: why are there any po- 
tatoes at all grown here. The main reason is that they are grown for 
home use and it is good business to grow them for this purpose even 
tho they are not as profitable a commercial crop as sugar-beets. When 
a very good crop of potatoes is raised there are more than enough for 
family use and some are sold, but usually this surplus is small. The 
growing of commercial potatoes in this district is sporadic. After a 
good potato year a few farmers are tempted to plant potatoes as a com- 
mercial crop. A few farmers plant them after alfalfa and before sugar- 
beets in the crop rotation because of the difficulty of growing sugar- 
beets following alfalfa on account of the undecayed alfalfa roots and 
crowns. 

Livestock. — Table VI shows the average number of livestock units (i) 
on the Hyde Park farms cooperating in this investigation. The units 
for 1916 are not calculated as the two-year average is sufficient for the 
purposes of this paper. 

There were 12 per cent more animal units on farms at Hyde Park 

(i)An animal unit is 1 cow, 1 bull, 1 grown steer, 2 young stock, 
1 horse, 2 colts, 7 sheep, 14 lambs, 5 hogs, 10 pigs, or 100 poultry. The 
basis for such classification is the amount of feed required and manure 
produced. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



13 



in 1915 than in 1914. There were fewer work horses and more pro- 
ductive animal units (i) on the farms. There was an increase on the 
average of 0.7 units of milk cows, 1.6 units of other cattle, and 0.2 
units of other horses. There was 0.1 unit fewer hogs, but the same 
number of poultry in 1915 as in 1914. 

Of the 52 farms investigated in 1914, 1 had no milk cows, 1 had 1 
cow, 6 had 2 each, 14 had less than 5 each, 7 had 10 each, 8 had more 
than 10 each, 2 had 20 each, and 1 had 24 milk cows. The one farm 
that had a man hired by the year was one of the two farms that had 20 
milk cows. All of the milking and other work on livestock on the 
other farm with 2 cows and also on the farm with 24 cows was done 
ijy the respecii\e farmers and their families with extra help hired during 
rush crop-seasons. On the average there were 7.4 units of milk cows 
on the 32 farms which have cooperated for the three years. The most 
promising heifers are raised to replace the cows in the dairy herd and 
usually a few more are raised than are kept on the home farm as cows. 

In 1914 the net livestock receipts (^) for each $100 worth of feed 
fed were $10 7 on the 52 farms and $120 on the 10 better-paying farms. 
Ihe net livestock receipts for each productive animal unit were $G0 on 
all 52 farms and $60 also on the 10 better-paying farms. The net 
tattle receipts for each head kept were $22 on the average of the 52 
farms and $22 also on the average of the 10 better-paying farms. The 
milk receipts for each cow were $56 on the average of all farms and $62 
on the average of the 10 better-paying farms. 

In 1915 the net livestock receipts for each $100 worth of feed fed 
were on the average of all 48 farms, $97, of the 10 least-profitable 
larms, $52, and of the 10 better-paying farms, $133. The net livestock 
receipts for eacn productive animal unit were $25 on the average of all 
4 8 farms, $24 on the 10 least-profitable farms, and $57 on the 10 better- 
paying farms. (See Tables I and II in Appendix). 

Why do Hyde Park farmers on the average keep from 7 to 10 milk 
cows and why does the number of head vary from none to 24 on the 
individual farms? In general, the available pasture determines the 

Table VI. — Average number of Units of Livestock on Farms, Hyde 
Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 and 1915 



Kind of 
Livestock 



Average Number of Units of Livestock 



32 Farms 



on Farms 



52 

Farms 

1914 



10 Better-pay- 
ing Farms 
1914 



Total animal units 

Work horses 

Productive an. units 

Milk cows 

Other cattle (3) 

Other horses (^).... 

Sheep 

Hogs 

Poultry I 



1 19.5 


3.9 


1 15.6 


7.4 


5.8 


1.2 


1 -1 


.6 1 


•5 



18.4 I 

4.0 I 
14.4 I 

7.1 1 

5.0 I 

1.1 I 

■1 I 
.6 I 
.5 I 



20.6 

3.8 

16.9 

7.8 

6.6 

1.3 

.1 

.5 

.5 



4.0 

L4.8 

7.5 

5.1 

1.0 

.0 

.6 

.6 



29.3 

5.6 

23.7 

10.1 

9.5 

2.1 

.1 

1.1 



(')"Pi'oductive animal units'' includes all livestock except work stock. 

(^)The net livestock receipts are found by subtracting the sum of 
the purchases and what is on hand at the beginning of the year from 
tne sum of the sales and that on hand at the close of the year. 

(3) Includes dry dairy-stock and beef cattle. 

(O Includes colts, ponies, and stallions. 



14 Bulletin No. 177 

amount of livestock kept and there are at present about as many units 
kept on each farm as the pasture, in its present condition, will support. 
Counting 7.4 units of milk cows and 2.6 units of young dairy-stock as 
being pastured on the farms, there are 10 animal units to 40 acres of 
pasture, or 4 acres to each animal unit pastured. The 40 acres of pas- 
ture includes tillable pasture, low wet-land, unirrigated bottom- 
land, and mountain pasture. There are about 2.8 acres of pasture for 
each productive animal unit. However, some of the meat cattle and dry 
dairy-stock are grazed on the Cache National Forest. From 1 to 3 
acres of irrigated pasture is sufficient for an animal unit, but from 10 
to 30, or an average of about 17 acres(i) of mountain pasture is neces- 
sary for each animal unit for the grazing season of 5 to 8 months. 
That the Cache National Forest is grazed to about its full capacity is 
shown in the paragraph on the National Forests. From personal in- 
quiries and observations extending over the period of this investigation, 
the writer is convinced that unless pastures are improved, but slight 
increases are possible in the number of cattle kept. The farmers know 
quite generally that it is to their advantage to keep as many as they 
have pasture for. The hope of the future is therefore in the improve- 
ment of the pastures and stock kept. 

Another ftictor which sometimes limits the number of cows kept is 
the number that can be milked by the average farm family, without 
hindering too much the work on cash and feed crops. This does not seem 
to be eft'ective here, as the average farm family at home in 1914 consisted 
of 6 persons. Without neglecting crop work, education, or social duties, 
undoubtedly more than 7.4 cows can be milked without the aid of the 
farm women in doing it. 

The variation in the number of cows kept on the individual farms is 
also due to the available pasture. But it is also a result of the variations 
in capacity and efficiency of individual farmers and farm families. Per- 
sonal factors affect individual cases and thus affect the average of the 
district. These points are further discussed in the paragraphs on Popu- 
lation, The Farm Family, and Farm Labor. 

The question arises as to why there are any beef cattle kept at all. 
Why are not sufficient dairy cows kept to utilize all of the farm pasture 
and available grazing land? As a rule the beef cattle are range cattle. 
They do well on the range but milk cows give but little milk if turned out 
on the range each morning. They have to travel too far to get to the 
range and when they get there, feed is too scarce to produce much milk. 
Therefore to utilize the range to best advantage range stock are kept on 
it. The reason that milk cows are kept instead of all range stock is be- 
cause the farm pastures and farm labor are more profitably utilized with 
milk cows than with range stock. It is true that the two farmers who 
have considerable numbers of range cattle have been making good labor 
incomes. In fact their farms have been classed among the 10 better-pay- 
ing farms each of the three years. But they have permits to graze their 
cattle on the Cache National Forest and the other farmers cannot get such 
a permit readily and find it necessary therefore to keep dairy cows. This 
point is further discussed in a later paragraph. 

Colts are raised both for work and for sale. Hyde Park has somewhat 
of a reputation among farmers of Cache County for the grade Percheron 
horses raised there. Horse buyers from Los Angeles and elsewhere recog- 
nize that at Hyde Park good, sound work horses can be bought. The 
farmers take pride in good colts. Purebred stallions are maintained in 
the district. They are usually owned cooperatively. 

In 1914 on the average of all 52 farms there was 1 work horse to each 
14 acres of crops. The same ratio existed in 1915. The ratios on the 

ri) Barnes, W. C, and Jardine, J. T., U. S. D. A., Office of Sec, Rep. 
No. 110 (July, 1916). p. 87. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 15 

averages of tlie 10 better-paying farms in 1914 and 1915 respectively were 
1 horse to 19 acres of crops and 1 liorse to 15 acres of crops. (See Tables 
I and II in Appendix). 

Farms tliat have milk cows that are driven down and up the "Cow 
Lane" to and from the pastures, usually have ponies for the children to 
ride in making this trip. 

Only 5 farms have any sheep, 1 has but one sheep, 1 has 2, 1 has 10, 
1 has 14, and 1 has 19 sheep, making in all a total of 46 sheep including 
lambs. These few sheep are kept as scavengers. They clean out the 
weeds along the irrigating ditches and fences and clean up around the 
I'armstead. 

Hogs are raised mainly for home use. Most of them are bought as 
pigs, raised, and then butchered. A few farmers keep 1 to 4 brood sows 
and sell the pigs as little pigs, except enough for their own table use. One 
reason why more hogs are not kept is because all the farm homes and 
buildings are in town on town lots. A herd of hogs would be very unde- 
sirable under these conditions. 

Hens are kept mainly to supply the farm family with eggs and meat. 
The surplus eggs are sold at the town store. Unless poultry is fenced in, 
it may be a nuisance to neighbors where houses are close together, gar- 
dens not protected with chicken wire, and the garage door not always 
closed. Only 5 farms report having 100 hens or more, 2 of these have 
just 100 each, 1 has 130, and 2 have 200 each. All of these farm homes 
are out of the town proper, except 1 and that one is on the northeast cor- 
ner of a block and no other house is within a block of it. 

The hogs and hens are fed largely on table scraps, grain screenings, 
skim milk, and other waste-feeds. Bran and shorts are sometimes fed to 
hogs for a short period before killing. The bran is obtained from grists. 
The wheat is taken to the mill and flour and bran brought back. 

Summary of Crops and Livestock. — The details of crop and livestock 
conditions at Hyde Park have been given in the previous paragraphs. 
There are three general outstanding features, however, of which special 
mention should be made. The first distinctive thing to note is that most 
of the farm land is irrigated and most of the farmers raise sugar-beets on 
a part of this irrigated land and milk a few cows. But the irrigable land 
and irrigation water are limited. Suitable pasture for milk cows is also 
limited. To extend the individual farm business by buying irrigated land 
means to leave some one else less irrigated land to operate. The same is 
true with pasture. Therefore to extend the individual farm business in 
either of these two directions means to eliminate to that extent the compe- 
tition of one's neighbors. The second distinctive factor is the dry-farming 
practised by a few of the farmers. And one should note that there is only 
a limited amount of dry-farm land and this has already been utilized by 
farmers desiring to extend their farm business rather than by new men 
specializing in dry-farming. The third feature which deserves special 
mention in this summary is the range cattle business. There are only a 
few men who run range cattle on the Cache National Forest. This is 
because it is so difficult to obtain grazing permits, as the range is stocked 
to its present capacity. These three features are important. They are 
found in varying combinations in many districts of the intermountain 
region. But they are not found in any other section of. the country com- 
liined in exactly these same proportions. 

Diversity and Raianco of Farm Business. — Why do farmers raise 
sugar-beets and wheat instead of raising more pasture, barley, oats, and 
alfalfa as feed for livestock? While sufficient data to prove the point is 
lacking the obvious answer to the question is that livestock enterprises 
are not sufficiently profitable to cause the farmers to give up growing 
these cash crops for the other practice. On the average the combination 
is more profitable than the specialization. Raising cash crops utilizes the 



16 Bulletin No. 177 

available summer labor to good advantage. The sugar-beet crop, especial- 
ly, makes labor for school children. The combination of livestock and 
these -cash crops makes a more diversified and better balanced farm busi- 
ness and therefore a safer and more desirable business for the average 
f.^rmer than the specialized livestock farming. 

In 1914 the average number of different crops grown on the 52 farms 
was 4.6. There were 3 sources of income the receipts from each of which 
amounted to at least 8 per cent of the gross farm receipts. These three 
were sugar-beets, $705; milk and its products, $400; and grain, $302. 
The average incomes from other sources were hay, $44; potatoes, $16; 
fruit and vegetables, $7; cattle, $22 7; horses, $87; other livestock, $68; 
miscellaneous receipts, $2 38; and increase in inventory, due largely to 
livestock and feed and supplies and improvements, $416. (See Tables 
VII in Text and I in Appendix). 

Table VII. — Farm Receipts and Expenses, Average of 52 Farms, 
Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 



Receipts $2,510 

Crops $1,074 

Sugar-beets $705 

Small-grains 302 

Hay ^ 44 

Potatoes 16 

Fruits and Vegetables 7 

Livestock 798 

Milk and milk products 400 

Cattle 227 

Horses - - 87 

Other Livestock 68 

Miscellaneous receipts — 238 

Increase in inventory (largely livestock and feed) 416 

Expenses 882 

Labor 387 

Hired labor and board 183 

Unpaid family labor 204 

Taxes (personal and property including water tax) 109 

Other farm expenses(0 386 

Of the total receipts, $1,074 or 43 per cent were from crops, $798 or 
■^.2 per cent from livestock and livestock products, $400 or 16 per cent 
from increase in inventory, and $238 or 9 per cent were from miscellane- 
ous sources, the main one of which is outside labor. Of the $882 of farm 
expense, $387 or 44 per cent was for labor. Excluding taxes the expense 
for labor including unpaid family labor amounted to 50 per cent of the 
total expenses. 

In 1915 the average of 4 8 farms shows that 35 per cent of the total 
farm receipts were from stock and stock products. (See Table II in 
Appendix). 

The 10 better-paying farms grew on fhe average 5.1 different crops 
and had 4 sources of income each of which was over 8 per cent of the 
gross farm receipts. The sources of income were sugar-beets $1,075, 
grain $891, milk and its products $597, and cattle $35 6. In 1915 on the 
?verage of the 10 better-paying farms the receipts from stock and stock 
products amounted to 3 8 per cent of the total farm receipts. 

(1) Includes building, fence, and machinery purchases, repairs, and de- 
preciation; roughage and concentrates bought for feed; horseshoeing; 
breeding fees; veterinary bill; medicine; twine; threshing; fees; etc. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 17 

The balance between livestock kept and pasture has been discussed in a 
former paragraph. 

On the average one work horse is kept to each 14 acres of crops but 
on the 10 better-paying farms there are 19 crop acres to each work 
horse. There are about 4.4 acres of crops to each productive animal 
unit on the 10 better-paying farms and only 3.6 crop acres to each pro- 
ductive animal unit on the average of 52 farms. This ratio furnishes 
ample winter feed for stock and allows growing cash crops as well. 

The question arises as to how soil fertility is maintained on these 
farms. If we assume that each animal unit produces one ton of manure 
a month we have 234 tons of manure produced (19.5x12=234). If 
now we assume that half of that is lost to the crop land because the 
animals are on pasture for 6 months we have left but 117 tons. Be- 
tween 30 and 50 per cent of this will be lost in handling. Not more 
than 60 to 85 tons of manure will be put back on the crop land. Since 
most of the manure is spread from the wagon box with a fork the ap- 
plications will be about 15 tons to the acre. At this rate 4 to 6 acres 
might be covered each year or 20 to 30 acres covered once in a five 
year rotation. But since the general practice at Hyde Park is to apply 
the manure to the sugar-beet and potato land and garden, each acre 
will get an application of about 30 tons every five years, or an average 
of 6 tons a year. With this practice some of the fields have grown 
beets each year for 8 to 10 years and the yields are as good if not better 
than when they began to grow the crop. No other fertilizer is used at 
Hyde Park. 

Size of Farm Bu.sines.s. — There is no measure that is universally 
used as a standard in determining the size of farm business. When by 
size, capacity in contrast with efficiency is intended, the most accurate 
measure is the total cost of operating the farm business. This includes 
(1) cash paid out, (2) value of unpaid family labor, (3) value of the 
operator's labor, (4) interest on the capital investment, (5) all depre- 
ciation charges, and (6) any decrease in the inventory of feed and sup- 
plies(i). This measure of size has not been calculated for these records 
because in this study other measures serve the purpose better by being 
more suggestive. For this publication it is not necessary to have size 
so accurately measured because no attempt is made to determine the 
most profitable size of farm business. A number of other measures 
have been used that have considerable significance. In 1914 the aver- 
age capital investment in the 52 farms was $13,642. The average farm 
receipts were .$2,510. On the average the farms contained 10 5 acres. 
5 4 of which were in crops. The average size of farm business in 1915 
and 1916 did not differ greatly from that in 1914. (See Tables I and 
II in Appendix). Where the farm business was not sufficiently large 
some farmers increased the size by renting additional land as shown in 
Table III. Undoubtedly other farmers increased the size of the farm 
business unit which they operated by purchasing additional land and 
livestock. As a rule a farmer who has a small business realizes that he 
might make more money if his business were larger, but often he is 
incapable of overcoming all the obstacles to enlarging the business. 

Some reasons for small farms here are revealed by the history of 
settlement. In the fall of 1859 Wm. Hyde (after whom the town was 
named). Simpson M. Molen, and Patterson D. Griffith, left Lehi. Utah 
County, for Cache County, for the purpose of obtaining farms and mak- 
ing home for their families. They arrived at the present site of Hyde 
Park, and found there a small creek flowing from the mountains which 

n)Spillman, W. J., U. S. D. A., Farm Management Cir. 1.. (Jan. 
1916), p. 13. 



18 Bulletin No. 177 

could be used for irrigating crops and for cullinary purposes. They 
used their squatters rights and staked out claims. After staking out 
their claims these three men returned to Lehi for the winter. 

The exact number of acres first laid out is not known, but Wm. Hyde, 
son of the pioneer, estimated that not more than 50 acres were included 
in each farm as originally staked out. One reason for not taking larger 
farms was the'scarcity of water. The little creek would not irrigate 
more land than was then included in the three claims. Dry-farming 
was unknown at that time and the possibilities of irrigation water being 
taken from Logan River were not then anticipated. Another reason is, 
that with the little machinery then in general use, 50 acres of irrigated 
land made a good family-sized farm. 

In the spring of 18 60 they returned to their claims to find that 
another party, of which Robert Daines was a member, had squatted on 
the same claims that the Lehi party had staked out the fall before. 
The difficulties which arose over this situation were amicably settled by 
dividing the land between the parties so that each farmer had from 10 
to 25 acres. This was about all that he could take care of under the 
then existing conditions. 

After the passage of the Homestead Act (1862) and the possibilities 
of obtaining irrigation water from the Logan River were appreciated, 
tracts of 160 acres were homesteaded. But few of these large units 
remain intact now. Most of them have been divided and redivided. 
Some parents desiring children to remain near home when they married 
and began for themselves gave a portion of the farm to each child. 
Other farms have been left as estates and consequently divided among 
tne children and later each piece sold as a separate entity. 

Other reasons why farms are not larger are the inability of the 
operators to handle a larger business because of old age, ill health, 
physical infirmities, lack of capital or credit, scarcity of labor, unde- 
pendableness of farm labor, and inconvenience of having hired labor 
around the farm home. 

At present it is common for a farm unit to be composed of 5 to 8 
separate pieces of land which may be 1 to 3 miles apart from each 
other. This situation wastes labor but perhaps allowes greater diver- 
sity of farm enterprises as a partial compensation. The fact that farm 
families live in town and have the barns and chores in town wastes 
labor and reduces the acreage that a family can farm. In spite of these 
handicaps a fairly large farm business is done on the average farm at 
Hyde Park, and the labor income secured shows that the farmers are 
prosperous. (See paragraph on Farm Profits and Tables I and II in 
appendix). 

Farm 3Iaclunery. — The machines used on the farms in this area are 
of modern type and construction. Irrigated grain is cut with self- 
binders and dry-farm grain either with self-binders or headers, and 
threshed by steam threshers. Mowing machines, self-dump hay-rakes, 
hay loaders, buck rakes, derricks, hay forks, hay nets, etc., are in gen- 
eral use. Most of the alfalfa is pitched on the wagon by hand and 
unloaded at the barn or stack with derrick and fork. No special potato 
or corn machinery is used, as these crops are not of sufficient importance 
to justify owning it. Most of the plowing is done with 1 and 2-bottom 
sulky plows. Some two way gangs and disk plows are used on the 
dry-farms. Usually three or more horses are used in plowing. How- 
ever, some plowing on the irrigated farms is done with two horses and 
the walking plow. Sugar-beet seed is drilled in in the spring. The 
farmers usually pay the sugar manufacturing company $2.25 an acre for 
seed and $0.50 an acre for seeding, or $2.75 an acre for seed and seeding. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



19 



Table VIII. — Average Value of Farm Machinery, Hyde Park Farms, 
Cache County, Utah, 1914, 1915, and 191G. 



Value per Farm 



3 Year | | I 

Averagel 1914 | 1915 | 1916 



Value per 
Crop Acre 



1914 I 1915 



Average of all 52 farms | 

Average of all 4 8 farms.. | 

Average of all 32 farms j $421 

Average of 10 best farms.... | 479 

Average of 10 poorest farms] 40 8 



$422 

407 
531 
444 



$4691 

46lj $395 

489| 416 

4051 374 



$7.81 



$9.02 



5.061 

I 



7.76 
7.94 



The beets are cultivated with 1 and 2-horse beet cultivators and are 
plowed out in the fall with beet plows. Table VIII shows that the 
average value of machinery in this district is about $420 to the farm 
and ranges from $141 to $1,622 to the farm. There were $5 to $9 
worth of machinery for each acre of crops. The more profitable farms 
have more macliinery on each farm and less for each acre of crops than 
the average farm. 

The average value of farm machinery on each farm in 7 areas in 
Utah in 1914 was $449 (M. The farms with the larger amount of capi- 
tal have a greater numerical amount but a less proportionate amount of 
it invested in machinery than do the farms with less capital. The value 
of machinery for each crop-acre is less and consequently macliinery 
cost for each acre of crops is less on the large farms than on the small 
The efficiency of farm machinery 



increases with an increase in 



farms 

the acres of crops(-). 

The perfection of machinery causes great changes in the type of 
farming. As the cotton gin, threshing machine, and steel plow have 
made great changes possible, so may the perfected sugar-beet thinner 
and topper wlien developed. 

Buildings. — The type of farming followed and the size of the farm 
business determine the kind and size of farm buildings required. The 
farm buildings at Hyde Park consist of dwelling house, cow and horse 
barn, milk house, small pig-pen, hen house, machine shed, and granary. 
On a few farms the cow barn is separate from the horse barn. Not all 
the farms have a milk house. The size of the milk house and cooling 
trough should be correlated directly with the number of cows milked 
and the care given the milk. The hen houses and machine «heds are 
usually very ordinary lumber structures. Since but a few hogs are 
kept a small hog-pen is all that is necessai-y. Some fairly large and 
well built granaries are found, some of which were constructed twenty- 
five or thirty years ago when wheat was raised on the irrigated land as 
a cash crop. Some of these are little used now but others are used for 
the dry-farm wheat, spring wheat, and oats. 

It sometimes happens that the farm buildings determine the farm 
practice on a given farm at a given time. It has happened at Hyde 
Park, that because of insufficient storage space, grain and potatoes have 
of necessity been sold in the fall at harvest time when if the storage 
space had been available they would have been held until winter or 
spring. 

(i)Brossard, E. B., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 160, (Sept. 1917)^ 
p. 14, Table XI. 
(-)Ihid., p. 35. 



20 . Bulletin No. 177 

The value of the farm dwelling was estimated by the farmers on 
the basis of selling value as a home. The homes are not on the farms 
in this district and the two may easily be valued separately. 'The other 
buildings were estimated at sale value for the purpose for which they 
are being used or for any other use for which they are appropriate. 

In 1914 only fifty of the fifty-two farms reported dwellings. The" 
average value was $1,335. Dividing the total value of all dwellings 
reported by 52 gives $1,284. The average value of dwellings on 309 
irrigated Utah farms in seven areas in 1914 was $1,056 (i). The aver- 
age value of other buildings on the 30 9 farms mentioned above was 
$412. On the 309 farms the average value of buildings was $14 to 
each acre of land. The cost of livestock shelter is less on the large 
farms than on the small farms because of the greater number of live- 
stock units kept. The larger farms have better dwellings and better 
barns than the smaller farms. 

Climate. — The climate of Utah is the most important single factor 
determining the type of farming. Low precipitation makes a desert out 
of a strip along the western edge of Utah 50 miles wide and running 
north and south almost the entire length of the State. Lack of suf- 
ficient rainfall in the crop-growing season makes it necessary to irrigate 
in most parts of the State. Where irrigation water is scarce or unavailable 
and precipitation amounts to 12 inches or more, with other conditions 
favorable, dry-farming may be practised. There are perhaps 20,000,000 
acres of land in the State that will never be cultivated because of poor 
climate. The climate, topography, and soil prevent the cultivation of 
millions of acres. The type of farming is of necessity adapted to the 
climatic conditions. Wheat and barley are important dry-farm crops 
because they are successfully grown with slight precipitation. Alfalfa is 
well adapted to dry climates where irrigation is practised and is ideally 
grown where, with other conditions satisfactory, the dry, hot, rainless 
days make it easy to harvest the hay. 

At Hyde Park (2) the mean annual precipitation is 16 inches (See 
Figs. 2 and 3), 7 inches of which fall during the six months from April 
to September, (See Fig. 4). The lowest and highest annual precipita- 
tion recorded are 13 inches and 26 inches, respectively. There are 62 
days annually with 0.01 inch or more precipitation. The average mean 
annual temperature is 47.6" F. with a mean difference between night 
and day of 21.9" F.(3), (See Fig. 5). The average number of days in 
the growing season, between spring and fall killing frosts, is 151, (See 
Fig. 6). The dates of the average and absolute last killing frost in the 
spring and the average and absolute first killing frost in the fall are 
May 10 and June 17, and October 8 and September 14, respective- 
ly. The average and absolute hottest days in the summer are 95" F. 
and 10 Of F., respectively, while the average and absolute coldest 
days in winter are -11" F. and -19o F., respectively. The mean tempera- 
ture for January, the coldest month of the year, is 24.4° F., and for 
July, the warmest month of the year, 71.5" F. The annual rate of 
evaporation from a free water surface is 4 5 to 5 5 inches. The mean 
humidity during the day is about 50 per cent, (See Figs. 7 to 12, 
inclusive) . 

Topography.-— Farming by irrigation is especially dependent on 
topography. The Hyde Park farm land slopes gently from the moun- 
tains west toward the center of the valley. This facilitates irrigation 

(i)Brossard, E. B., Utah Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 160, (Sept., 1917), p. 14. 

(2) There is no weather station at Hyde Park. The data given here 
are recorded by the U. S. Weather Bureau for Logan, which is 414 
miles south. 

(3)West, F. L. and Edlefsen, N. E. Utah Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 166, 
(March, 1919), p. 9. 



S()t)i(i Tapes of I ligation Farming in Utah 



21 






.:.-J j i 




— r- - - r,-^ ■■'^ 


*"».- 


-f'^^-^ 


^^ 






2. Average Annual Precipi- 
tation, Utah. 
S. D. A., Weather Bureau) 




Fig. 3. — Average Annual Precipi- 
tation in inches in areas 
investigated, Utah. 







„ _ii_}ri:l.J: 



^^^.^^-^— ^ 




Pig 4. — Average Precipitation in 
Crop Growing Season, Utah. 




Fig. 5. — Mean Annual Tem- 
perature, Utah. 



on most of the land, but on some farms the slope is excessive for the 
nest irrigation The meadows and pastures on the west side of the 
State road are level and wet where low lying, but dry where the land 
is slightly elevated or rolling. The arable land is easily worked with 
the improved machinery. The farmers of Hyde Park who have dry- 



22 




Bulletin No. 177 




Fig 6. — Average Days in Crop 
Growing Season, Utah. 



Fig. 7. — Average Date of Last 
Killing Frost in Spring, Utah. 





Fig. 8. — Average Date of First 
Killing Frost in Autumn, Utah. 



Fig. 



9. — Latest Date of Killing 
Frost in Spring, Utah. 



stock or beef cattle, usually graze them east of town on the range 
afforded by the Cache National Forest. Some, however, who have an 
abundance of meadow-pasture that is too wet or too dry for other uses, 
keep the drv-stock at home on these pastures. 

In a general way topography determines the type of farming prac- 
tised thruout a very large part of the State of Utah. The topographical 



Some TuiH's of In inatio)! l-'nr)!nit<f in Utah 



23 





Fig. 10. — Earliest Date of Killing Fig. 11.— Highest Temperatures 
Frost in Autumn, Utali. Recorded, Utah. 





Fig. 12. — Lowest Temperatures 
Recorded, Utah. 



Fig. 13. — Mountains. Valleys, 

Lakes, and Streams, Utah. 
(Dept. of Geology, U. A. C.) 



map, Figure 13, shows the mountains and the valleys of the State. 
The mountains are not likely ever to be cultivated. This eliminates 
approximately 40 per cent of the entire State from cultivation. The 
only agricultural use for this vast area of about 20,000.000 acres is 
grazing livestock. On farms conveniently situated this tends to establish 
a type of farming based upon the grazing of livestock and makes the 



24 Bulletifi No, 177 

agricultural value of the ranges dependent upon their productivity as 
grazing lands. It is probable, because of these and other conditions that 
the livestock enterprises will be of greater importance in the future 
than in the past(i). Especially will this be true on farms conveniently 
situated. 

Soil. — Table IX gives a description of the Hyde Park soil types and 
the number of farms reporting each type. The descriptions are those 
given by the farmers themselves and are therefore not technical. 

Table IX. — Soil Types and Farms Reporting, 52 Hyde Park Farms, 
Cache County, Utah. 



Description 



Farms Reporting 



i. Clay Lioam 

2. Black Loam 

3. Sandy Loam -•. 

4. Gravelly Loam. 

5. Clay 

6. Black Clay Loam 

7. Loam 

8. Sandy Clay Loam 

9. Clay and Gravelly Loam 

10. Gravelly Clay Loam 

11. Gravelly Clay Sandy Loam. 

12. Gravel 



21 

10 

10 

10 

5 

3 

2 

■ 2 

2 

2 



There is a great variety of soil types as described by the farmers. 
The soil on any one farm may vary from heavy clay to coarse gravel. 
These conditions are typical of the entire Cache Valley. 

All of the farming lands of Cache County are in the Bonneville 
beds(2). (See Figures 14, 15, and 16). The soils were formed from 
sediments deposited from this ancient lake. Since its subsidence they 
have been considerably modified by inflowing streams and by weather- 
ing. The soils vary from gravel, small gravel and light sand thru all 
grades to the heaviest and most tenacious clays. The upper benches of 
the deltas around the mouths of the canyons, and also the shore benches 
of Lake Bonneville, are covered with gravelly soils grading down into 
coarse gravel. These soils are well underdrained and therefore free 
from an excess of salts, but owing to the thinness of the soil proper, 
and to the difficulty of applying water and cultivating the Soil, they 
were but little farmed until about 20 years ago. Since that time these 
sioils have proved very productive both under irrigation and with dry- 
farm methods. The soils of the lower benches contain less gravel, but 
are sandy and of light texture. 

Upon the lower and more level parts of the valley there are great 
variations in the soils. In those parts farthest from the inflowing 
streams, where the water movement was slow, the soils are heavy and 
often contain as high as 50 per cent of clay. Nearer the mouths of 
streams, where the water movement was more rapid, the soils are 
nolif-e.'ibly lighter, grading thru loam, sandy loam, sandy, or gravelly. 
Irrigation on the loose soils results in the transportation of consider- 
able salt to the lower and heavier soils, where it is most difficult to get 
rid of. In Cache Valley there is a large area of wet clay-land which is 

(i)Barnes, W. C, and Jardine, J. T., U. S. D. A., Ofl^ice of Secretary, 
Rpt. No. 110, (July, 1916), pp. 13 to 15. 

(2)Means, Thomas H., U. S. D. A., Bur. of Soils, Field Operations. 
(1899). 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



25 




IT 



C3' 



w—t 



Q 



Fig. 14. — Extent of Old Lake Bonne- 
ville in Utah, where Soils . of the 
Great Interior Basin Originated, 
(after J. A. Widtsoe) 



Fig. 15. — Three General Soil 

Provinces in Utah. 

(after Milton Whitney) 



used foi- i.!('r:dow and grazing, the value of which could be much en- 
hanced by drainage and cultivation. Both black and white alkali are 
present in limited spots in the west-central part of the valley. The 

black alkali is always associated 
with the white alkali. Irrigation and 
seepage waters are the sources of 
these alkali spots. 

National Forests and Public Stock 
Ranges. — The control of grazing oiv 
the national forests by the Federal 
Government has been a benefit to 
the livestock business and farming 
in general and thus to the country 
as a whole. But when the act was 
passed creating the National Forests, 
it was not known that it would, (1) 
eliminate free competition in the 
use of grazing lands, (2) establish a 
privileged class of farmers, and (3) 
determine the type of farming on 
many farms adjacent to the reser- 
vations. Yet this is what has hap- 
pened. This situation is admitted 
but at present no good solution of 
the problem is advanced. 

The Cache National Forest bord- 
ers the dry-farm land east of Hyde 
Park and includes the mountains. (See Figure 17). In 1916 there were 
833,898 acres of land within its boundaries, 319,581 acres of which were 
in Utah and 514,317 acres in Idaho(i). Of the 319,581 acres in Utah, 

(i)Kneipp, L. F., Third Annual Rpt. Utah Bu. Immigration, Labor, 
and Statistics, (1916), pp. 184-5, "Utah's Forest Resources." 




Fig. 



Soil Surveys 



Utah. 



26 



Bulletin No. 177 



iNTCR-MOUNfTAIN 
REGION 



52,515 were private lands within tlae forest and 267,066 acres were the 
net national forest lands. 

The average grazing season is 5 to 8 months long. On the average, 
for the three years 1914, 1915, and 1916, there were 21,750 head of 
cattle and horses, and 132,467 sheep and goats grazed on the 833,898 
acres less the privately owned land in both Utah and Idaho. In other 
words there are 40,674 animal units grazed here, or 1 animal unit to 
about 17 acres. This is the estimated grazing capacity of the forest(i). 
This shows that the Cache National Forest is now grazed to its capacity. 
Farmers who had stock to put on the ranges at the beginning of 
regulation have the prior right today. They are desirous of increasing 
the number allowed them under their permits. New farmers want to 
get stock on the ranges. This is difficult. In order to do so they muSt 
get a permit from the Federal Government. There are three ways of 

obtaining permits: (1) buy one 
from some farmer at the same time 
as you buy his farm; (2) wait your 
turn until some one goes out of the 
business, or so reduces his herd as 
to allow other animals on the range; 
or (3) await the improvement of 
the range, by the regulations of the 
Federal Government, so that its 
capacity is increased. By either the 
second or third method, but few 
stock may be added at a time, and 
in most cases it is poor economy to 
have so few head on the range. 

The deciding who shall have stock 
on the ranges, and how many each 
shall have, is a function of the Dis- 
trict Forester, who is an official of 
the Federal Government. This may 
or may not be a good thing. In the 
past it has undoubtedly been a 
benefit. But all that it is necessary 
to point out here is that the Federal 
Government thus becomes a very 
important factor in determining the type of farming on the farms of the 
Intermountain States. This is particularly true in Utah and especially 
in Cache County and Hyde Park. 

Table X shows the value of all domestic animals on farms and 
ranges by counties in Utah, April 15, 1910. A comparison of Table X 
and Figure 17, giving the location of the National Forests, shows that 
more livestock are kept in the districts where the ranges are located. 

Population. — From the early settlement at Salt Lake City (1847) 
others soon developed both north and south wherever irrigation water 
was available and the soil and climate made agriculture possible. (See 
Figure 18). The settlement of Hyde Park began in 1860 or about 60 
years ago. The climate of Hyde Park is delightful because of the light 
and infrequent rains, the clear and sunshiny days, the dry ground 
underfoot, the dry air, and the mild wind with a velocity of but five 
miles an hour. While these factors contribute to a pleasant and agree- 
able habitat for man, at the same time they make it necessary to irrigate 
most of the crops of Cache County and the State and make vegetation 
light where irrigation is impossible. 

(1) Barnes, Will C, and Jardine, J. T., U. S. D. A., Office of Sec, Rpt. 
No. 110, (July, 1916), p. 87. 




?""ig. 17. — National Forests of 
Intermountain Region, 
(after L. F. Kneipp) 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



27 



Table X. — Value of all Domestic Animals on Farms and Ranges, by 
Counties, Utah, April 15, 1910 (i) 



Area 
State 
County 

1. Utah 

2. Sanpete.... 

3. Boxelder.. 

4. Cache 

5. Salt Lake 

6. Wasatch.. 

7. Sevier 

8. Iron 

9. Garfield... 

10. Rich 

11. Weber 

12. Millard.... 

13. San Juan 

14. Uinta 



Value 
'?2 8,3 30;2T5' 



$ 2. 
2, 
2, 
1, 
1 
1, 
1, 
1, 
1, 



313 
281, 
230, 
975 
639 
388 
301 
210 
033, 
992 
950 
934 
910 
894 



981 
140 
539 

257 
631 
374 
279 
637 
687 
966 
804 
760 
517 



Area 


Value 


State 


$28,330,215 


County 

15 Summit 


$ 886,029 


16 Grand 


864,538 


17. Davis 

18 Juab 


817,654 
804,834 


19. Washington.. .- 
2 Kane 


794,334 
724,925 




698,236 




592,914 


23. Wayne 


521,722 


24. Beaver 


516,365 
429,188 




357,546 


27 Piute 


263,460 







Hyde Park had a population of 699 according to the 1910 census. 
The character of its population is assumed to be about the same as of 
Cache County as given by the 1910 United States census. 





Fig. 18. — Distribution of Popula- Fig. 19. — Density of Population 
tion by Counties, Utah. (Persons per sq. mi.) by Counties, 

(1910 U. S. Census) Utah. (1910 U. S. Census). 

The population for Cache County was 23,062 in 1910; 18.139 in 
1900; 15.509 in 1890; 12,562 in 1880; 8,229 in 1870; and 2.605 in 
1860. In 1910 there were 11,458 males and 11,604 females in the 



(1)1910 U. S. Census. 



28 



Bulletin No. 177 



county. There were 19.8 persons per square mile. But the density of 
the rural population was 13.4 persons per square mile. (See Figure 19). 

Of the total population 46.3 per cent was urban and 53.7 per cent 
was rural. There were only 64 colored people in the county, 7 of whom 
Avere negroes, 5 males and 2 females, and 57 Indians, Chinese, Japanese^ 
and all others. 

There were 5,230 males of voting age, 64 of whom were illiterate, 
or 1.2 per cent. Of all persons 10 years old and over, 215, or 1.3 per 
cent were illiterate. There were 8,399 persons, 6 to 20 years old in- 
clusive, 5,9 82 of whom, or 71.2 per cent were attending school. There 
were 9,800 native whites of native parentage, 9,421 native whites of 
foreign or mixed parentage, and 3,777 foreign-born whites. Of the 
3,777 foreign-born whites in the county, 979 came from England, 825 
from Denmark, 651 from Sweden, 405 from Switzerland, 272 from 
Norway, 201 from Germany, 149 from Scotland, 127 from Wales, 42 
from Canada, 32 from Italy, 18 from Ireland, 14 from Australia, 9 from 
Greece, 9 from Mexico, 8 from Russia, 5 from Austria, 4 from Finland, 
2 frorh France, 2 from Holland, 1 from Hungary, and 22 from other 
foreign countries such as Japan, China, India, etc. 

There were 4,12 5 native whites both of whose parents were born in 
the same foreign country. The parents of 1,463 of these native whites 
came from England, 1,019 from Denmark, 556 from Sweden, 325 from 
Switzerland, 225 from Norway, 221 from Scotland, 148 from Wales, 
111 from Germany, 2 3 from Italy, 11 from Canada, 11 from Ireland, 6 
from Russia, 3 from France, and 3 from Holland. 

It should be noted that most of the foreign-born whites and also the 
parents of the native-born whites of foreign parentage came from Great 
Britain and the countries of northwestern Europe. The people of these 
countries are usually industrious and thrifty. The type of farming 
practised in these foreign countries is similar in many ways to that 
practised at Hyde Park. The root crops, especially sugar-beets, were 
no doubt familiar to these persons before they came to this country. 
These persons were also undoubtedly familiar in some degree with the 
small-grains and hay. They also knew something about machine meth- 
ods in general farming. These conditions had some influence on their 
settling at Hyde Park and the type of farming followed there. 

Between 15 and 20 per cent of the rural male population of the 



Table 



XI. — Size of Family, Acres Sugar-Beets Raised, and Cows 
Milked, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 








<w >, 






CQ 




= 




m 






02 




M 






a 


^ a 


o m 


a m 


% 


if 


^a 




u 


0^ § 


o 




^ 


•o s 


Size of Farm 
Family (1) 


^ ft 

0) 




"^ fe S 

OJ O OJ 
ho >> 








a^ 




^ C 


M g 


?^ a "" 


^a 


M 2 


■° ^ 




a"" 


2 o 


> ^ 
< 


a ?3 


< 


a5 
1^ 


0^ ^ 

> o 


All Farms.— 


45 


7.4 


45 


41 


10.4 1 


43 1 


7.4 


Small 


16 


4.6 


44 


15 


8.3 


15 


6.0 


Medium 


17 


7.7 


43 


15 


9.2 


16 


7.1 


Large 


12 


10.6 


48 


11 


13.9 1 


12 


9.6 



(i)The Small Farm Families had from 2 to 6.9 members, the Medium 
Farm Families had from 7 to 8.9 members, and the Large Farm Famil- 
ies included those having from 9 to 14 persons each. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 29 

state are foreign-boru whites and therefore in studying the type of 
farming and its causes this factor should not be neglected. In 1910 
the total rural population of the State was 200,417, males 107,810 and 
females 92,607. There were 86,273 native-white males and 79,427 
native-white females, and 18,35 8 foreign-born white males and 11,641 
foreign-born white females. There were only 118 negro males and 67 
negro females in the State, and 1,661 Indian males and 1,441 Indian 
females. Forty-eight and three-tenths per cent of all rural males were 
under 2 years of age and 48.1 per cent of all rural males were between 
the ages of 20 and 64 years. Fifty-four and three-tenths per cent of all 
rural females were less than 20 years old. 

The P'arm Family. — The Hyde Park farms are family-sized farms. 
One manager is all that is required on any of them and he does the 
greater part of the farm work. There is only one farm on which there 
is a man hired for the entire year. Most of the farm labor is performed 
either by the farmer himself, unpaid family labor, or is hired by the 
month, day, or piece as needed during critical or rush seasons of the 
year. 

There were 4,623 families in Cache County in 1910 (i) and 4,430 
dwellings, or 104 families to each 100 dwellings. The average number 
of persons in a family was 5, and the average number in a dwelling 5.2. 
For the State the average number of persons in a family was 4.8, and 
the average number in a dwelling 5.1, as compared with 4.5 and 5.2 
persons in each family and in each dwelling respectively in the United 
States. The families are larger in Cache County than the average of 
the State, and the average of the State is larger than the average of the 
United States. 

The average number of persons in the farm families included in this 
investigation in 1914 is 7.4, but only 6 of these persons were on the' 
farm at the time it was visited. Hyde Park farm families are larger 
than the average Cache County farm family. The raising of children 
well is a part of the mission of every married couple according to the 
religious teaching of most of these farmers. Babies are most welcome 
in these farm homes. Consequently a type of farming is adopted that 
makes it possible to raise numerous children. Children while young 
are able to milk cows and thin sugar-beets to good advantage and thus 
contribute to the family income and help make their own living. Table 
XI shows that on those farms with the large families more acres of 
sugar-beets are raised and more milk cows are kept than on the farms 
with small families. The type of farming practised seems to have a 
definite relationship to the size of the farm family. 

Table XII does not show a marked correlation between size of farm 
family and labor income, because unpaid family labor has been sub- 
tracted as an expense in determining this figure. There is, however, a 
marked correlation between the size of family and crop acres, farm 
income, value of unpaid family labor, and family income. These facts 
indicate that the entire farm family is the basic unit around which the 
farm business is organized. 

Farmers, like the other factors of production, land and capital, 
i ave- two dimensions of productivity, capacity and eflficiency (-') . The 
farm home is one of the factors that contributes to the productivity of 
the farmer. The converse of this is also true. The productivity of the 
farmer largely determines his type of farm home. These two factors 
affect each other in such a way as to be called reciprocating factors. 
The farmer being born in a home is first affected by the home and sub- 

(ni910 United States Census. 

(^)Taylor, H. C, Am. Econ. Rev. Supp. Vol. VII, No. .1, (March) 
1917). "Two Dimensions of Productivity.'' 



30 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XII. — Size of Farm Family, Labor Income(i), Value of Unpaid 

Family Labor (-), Farm Income (a), and Family Income (■*), 

Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 











M 

c 


T3 




' 






















<o 


0) 






<v 


a 

o 


Size of 




I 3 


a 

o 
o 




5*^ 


a 
8 

c 

a 

c3 


Farm 
Family 


is- 




In 
O 


§33 


cp a 

=3 rt 


a 






O 


J 


d^ 
^ 




fe 


fe 


Small 


44 


39 


$ 600 


6 


$126 


$1,066 


$1,192 


Medium .. 


43 


50 


1,156 


14 


246 


1,833 


2,076 


Large ... 


48 


77 


897 


12 


414 


1,898 


2,312 



(i)Labor income was obtained by subtracting from the farm receipts, 
the farm expenses and interest on the average capital investment. Interest 
m this case was figured at 5 per cent but should have been figured at 8 
per cent. (See paragraph on Farm Profits). The value of hired labor 
was counted as an expense but no personal or living expenses were 
counted. If the farmer's sons or other members of the family did farm 
work without pay, their labor was counted as an expense and rated at what 
they would have received had they worked for their neighbors, or what it 
would have cost to have hired the work they did. Any increase in stock, 
feed, or other inventory items was counted as a receipt; a decrease was 
counted as an expense. Any increase in the value of land which might be 
thought of as unearned increment was not included as a receipt, but 
increases in land values due to improvements have been counted as 
receipts and the amount of the increase allowed was the same as the ex- 
pense of the improvement. No credit has been allowed for the farm 
products that were used in the farm home. The farm house has been 
considered as part of the farm capital investment. 

(-')The value of unpaid family labor was estimated on the basis of 
wages paid by neighbors for similar work and workmen and also on the 
basis of what it would cost to hire the same work done on the farm in 
ruestion. The child labor employed doing chores was not included when 
the tasks they performed would have been done by their father or some 
other member of the family, had they not been performed by the smaller 
children. No charge in farm expenses was made for child labor that just 
relieved the father or older brother from some menial task which they 
would have done themselves rather than hire it done. No charge for child 
labor should be made unless there is an actual opportunity value for the 
labor and then the charge should be made on the basis of the opportunity 
value. But sometimes it is difficult to estimate this opportunity value. 
Such cases arose at Hyde Park and the unpaid family labor was valued on 
the basis of what it would cost the individual farmer to hire such work 
done. It is evident that in either case the information rests on estimates. 
In the one case one estimates the amount of labor each child or grown boy 
or girl does, and in the other case he estimates the opportunity value of 
the labor at the given time. 

(3) Farm income was obtained by subtracting the farm expenses from 
the farm receipts. It is labor income plus interest. 

(*) Family income is the sum of the farm income and the value of 
unpaid family labor. It does not include the farm produce used in the 
house, house rent, or unearned Increase in land value. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



31 



sequently his own personal productivity affects his home. Table XIII 
shows the great variation in the value of the dwellings of the Hyde 
Park farmers. Two-thirds of these farm dwellings are valued at $1000 
and over and one-third of them are worth less than $1,000. 

Table XIII. — Value of Farm Dwellings, 50 Farms, Hyde Park, 
Cache County, Utah, 1914 



Range of Value of Farmhouse 


Number of Farms 


$100 to $4,000 


50 


500 or less. 

501 to $ 999 
1,000 to 1,499 
1,500 to 1,999 
2,000 to 2.499 


10 
7 

11 
8 
9 



Table XIV. — Relation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, 
Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 



Group of Farms 

According to 

Value of Farm 

Home 



Number 
of Farms 



Group 



Average 
Value 

of Farm 
Home 



Average I Average 
Labor Farm 
Income Income 



Farms. 



49 



$1321 



$863 I $1537 



$100 to $1000... 
$1000 to $2000. 
$2000 and over. 



479 
1274 
2492 



914 

806 
880 



1462 
1455 
1753 



Table XV. 



-Relation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, 
Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 



Group of Farms 

According to 

Value of Farm 

Home 



All Farms. 



$100 to $800..... 
^800 to $1500.. 
$1500 and over 



Number 

of Farms 

in 

Group 



49 



Average 
Value 

of Farm 
Home 



Average 
Labor 
Income 



I $1321 I 

I 



410 
1000 
2029 



$863 
961 
796 
848 



Average 
Farm 
Income 



$1537 
1446 
1498 
1623 



XV;.- -Relation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, 
Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 



Group of Farms 

According to 

Value of Farm 

Home 



Number 

of Farms 

in 

Group 



I Average 
Value 
of Farm 
Home 



Average 
Labor 
Income 



Average 

Farm 

Income 



All Farms. 



49 



$1321 I 



$863 



$1537 



$100 to $1200.... I 
$1200 to $2000.. I 
$2000 and over.. | 



646 
1473 

2492 



909 
739 

880 



1510 
1249 

1753 



32 Bulletin No. 177 

Altlio it may seem reasonable to expect that farmers who make the 
largest labor Incomes should have the more expensive homes, or that 
the farmers who have the more expensive homes should make the 
largest labor incomes, yet Tables XIV, XV, and XVI show that there is 
in reality no correlation between the value of the farm dwelling and the 
farmer's 1 -bor income. This illustrates how easily one may be mistaken 
in judging the prosperity of a farmer by the size and elegance of his 
dwelling Louse. 

Farm Labor. — It has been shown how family labor affects type of 
farming. Hired labor is also a determining element. At Hyde Park, 
in 1914, the average amount of labor employed on each farm was 
equivalent to 1.6 men, including the farm operator. This is .equivalent 
to 1 man, the operator, twelve months (1 year), and 7 months and 6 
days of additional man labor. In 1915 the average number of men on 
the 48 Hyde Park farms was 1.6 and on the 10 better-paying farms 1.5. 

In 1914 there were 11 farmers who hired help by the month. Only 
1 of these farms hired a man by the year. On the average, annual 
wages for month-help on each farm amounted to $230. Nine farms 
boarded help at least part of the time, the estimated average cost of 
which amounted to $55. Thirty-three farmers hired extra help (paid 
by month, day, or piece) during the rush season, usually thinning 
beets, hoeing or harvesting beets, or harvesting grain or hay, the cost 
of which averaged $128 for each farm. Thirty-two farms had, on the 
average, $2 86 worth of unpaid family labor. Including all farms of 
the area, the average value for each farm, of regular hired labor, extra 
labor, board of hired labor, and unpaid family labor, was $387. The 
farmers' estimates(i) of the value of their own labor for. the year varied 
from $200 to $1,000, and averaged $600. Therefore, the average value 
of all labor on each farm, in 1914, was $600 plus $387, or $987. The 
average amount paid for hired labor in 1916 on the 32 farms at Hyde 
Park was $127. Unpaid family labor averaged $87. The total value 
of labor other than the operator's, was, therefore, $214 as compared 
with $387 in 1914. 

The hoeing and cultivating of beets begins about two or three weeks 
after thinning. Beets are hoed from three to seven times during the 
season. They are irrigated from two to seven times a season, altho if 
done at the proper season, three to four times are sufficient(2). The 
hoeing and cultivating is usually done just after irrigation. The plow- 
ing on dry-farms is usually done as early in the fall as possible after 
the grain is taken off. 

The critical labor periods in the type of farming practised at Hyde 
Park are during beet thinning, fall plowing, fall planting, and beet 
pulling. The summer care of beets and potatoes conflicts as does also 
the planting of the commercial potatoes and the thinning of sugar-beets 
in the spring. This is one reason why more potatoes are not grown 
here. "When alfalfa or other hay is ready to cut the beet work stops 
and haying begins. The beet work is resumed as soon as the hay is up. 
As nearly as possible the irrigating is done when the crops need water. 
Sometimes both the beets and the alfalfa need it at the same time and 
thus a critical labor situation may arise in irrigating. As a general 
rule, the labor on these crops is not conflicting as to time that it should 
be done. (See Table XVII). The labor on the livestock and the crops 

(1) Based upon what he could hire out for to some one else. Some 
had had offers of positions and others estimated according to wages 
paid for labor they were able to perform. 

(2)Harris, F. S., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 156, (June, 1917). 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 33 

Table XVII. — Order of Crop Work at Hyde Park, Cache 
County, Utah(i) 



1. April 1 to 10 Planting sugar-beets 

2. April 2 to 20 Planting spring wheat 

3. April 5 to 15 Planting early potatoes 

4. April 10 to 20 Planting spring oats 

5. April 20 to 30 Planting corn 

6. May 20 to 30 Planting commercial potatoes 

7. May 20 to 30 Thinning sugar-beets 

8. June 15 Irrigating sugar-beets begins 

9. June 20 Cutting first crop of alfalfa 

10. July 1 --- Cutting timothy and clover begins 

11. July 6-- Digging early potatoes (grown for 

home use only) 

12. July 15 ..Harvesting winter wheat begins 

13. July 15 to 30 Harvesting winter wheat general 

14. August 1 to 10 Cutting second crop of alfalfa 

15. August 5 to 30 Harvesting spring oats 

16. Aug. 10 to Sept. 15 Harvesting spring wheat 

17. Sept. 15 - - Seeding winter wheat begins 

IS. Sept. 25 - -- Pulling sugar-beets begins 

19. Oct. 6 Digging commercial potatoes begins 



is largely non-competitive. The crop and stock enterprises are compli- 
mentary (2) to a considerable extent. 

It is not at all necessary that the farming business be so organized 
as to have the same labor requirements for each month of the year. In 
winter, children are in school, high school, and college, but in summer 
they are at home and available for farm work. Growing sugar-beets 
at Hyde Park supplies profitable employment for this seasonal supply 
of farm labor. The school children of Logan and the smaller towns of 
the county do much of the labor on the sugar-beet crop of Cache County. 

Man labor efficiency is indicated by the ratio of men to crop-acres 
and units of livestock. In 1914 the ratio of men to crop-acres was 1 
to 33 on the average of all 52 farms and 1 to 52 on the 10 better- 
paying farms. In 1915 the ratio was 1 to 3 3 on the average of all 48 
fnrms, 1 to 31 on the average of the 10 least-profitable farms, and 1 to 
42 on the average of the 10 better-paying farms. It must be remem- 
bered in this connection that the men who cared for the greater number 
of acres of crops were operating farms larger than the average. 

The ratio of men to productive animal units was 1 to 9 on the 
average of all 52 farms in 1914 and 1 to 12 on the average of the 10 
better-paying farms. In 1915 this ratio was 1 to 10 on the average of 
all 4 8 farms. 1 to 10 on the average of the 10 least-profitable farms, and 
1 to 14 on the average of the 10 better-paying farms. (See Tables I 
and II in Appendix). 

The paragraphs immediately preceding have shown the amount of 
hired labor used, the average cost of hired labor, the seasonal require- 
ments of labor, the critical labor periods, the labor conflicts on crop and 
stock enterprises, the immediately available supply of labor, and the 
efficiency of man labor with crops and stock on the Hyde Park farms. 
In Tables XVTII. XIX and XX, which follow, some of these factors are 
given for the State as a whole and for the individual counties in order 

(1) Baker. O. E.. and others, U. S. D. A. Yearbook, (1917), pp. 537 
to 591. or Yearbook Separate No. 758. 

(■.;)CoPnor, L. G.. Utah Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 165. (Oct., 1918), p 21, 
Table XVII. 



34 



Bulletin No. 177 



to iudicate roughly the general farm labor situation: Table XVIII 
shows the number and occupation of all males and females 10 year's of 
age or over engaged in agriculture in Utah in 1910. In the order of 
numbers employed in agriculture the occupation classes rank as follows: 
(1) Farmers and Dairy Farmers, males 7,60 6, females 47 9; (2) Farm 
and Dairy Farm Laborers working out, males 7,807, females 255; 
(3) Farm Laborers, home farm, 5,827; (4) Stock Herders, Drovers, and 
Feeders, 2,207; (5) Stock Raisers, 1,350; (6) Gardeners, 398; (7) 

Table XVIII. — Persons 10 Years of Age or Over, Engaged in 
Agriculture in Utah, 1910 (i) 



Occupation (^) 


1 1 
1 Total 1 

1 1 


10-13 1 
Years 


14-15 1 
Years 


16-20 
Years 


21-44 
Years 


45 and 
Over 


Males 


|35,876 


914 


1,183 


5,490 


18,443| 


9,837 



I' armers and Dairy 

Farmers...- '. 

Farm and Dairy Farm 
Laborers (Working out) 
Farm Laborers 

(Home Farm) .-. 

Stock Herders, Drovers, 

and Feeders 

Stock Raisers 

Gardeners 

Fruit Growers and Nur- 
serymen 

Garden Laborers .-.. 

orchard and Nursery 



I I 

117,6061 



5,827| 

2,207 

1,350 

398 



1471 



7431 



3041 



8261 



I 
313| 

228| 



171 



361 



I 
207| 

2,065| 

2,675| 

I 

458] 

. 24| 

51 

1| 
251 



,6871 



4,3831 



I 
1,499| 

l,56o| 
861| 
140| 

i 

145| 

821 



Farm and Dairy Farm | | 

Laborers j 255 1 

Farmers and Dairy | | 

Farmers 1 4791 



341 



291 



611 



I 

72| 

I 
1301 



7,712 



84 

136 
465 
244 

167 
103 



Laborers 


1 140| 


li 


51 


30| 


86| 


18 








Females ..- 


i 734] ■ 


34i 


29| 


661 


202| 


403 



59 
344 



(1)1910 U. S. 
Table VII, p. 523. 
(^)Ibid. 



Census, Vol. IV., Population-Occupation Statistics, 



(a) A Farmer- — A person who is in charge of a farm whether he 
owns it or operates it as a tenant, renter, or cropper. 

(b) A Farm Manager^ — A person who manages a farm for some one 
else for wages or salary. 

(c) A Farm Laborer — A person who works on a farm for someone 
else but not as a manager, tenant, or cropper. 

(d) A Woman Farmer — A woman who herself operates or runs a 
farm. 

(e) A Woman Farm Laborer — A woman working regularly at out- 
door farm work, even though she works on the home farm for 
her husband, son, or other relatives, and does not receive money 
wages. Women farm laborers are separated into two classes: 
(1) those working on the 'home farm', and (2) those 'working 
out'. 

(f) Children on Farms — Children who work for their own parents 
on a farm are classed as Farm Laborers on Home farm; but 
children who work on a farm for others are classed as Farm 
Laborers working out. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



35 



Fruit Growers, and Nurserymen, 313; (S) Garden Laborers, 22 8; and 
(9) Orchard and Nursery Laborers, 140. A total of 35,876 males and 
734 females or a grand total of 36,610 persons 10 years old or over 
were gainfully employed in agriculture in Utah in 1910, which is 1 for 
each 10.2 persons in the State. • . 



Table XIX. 



-Average Cost of Hired Labor on Farms, by Counties, 
Utah, 1910(1) 





Cash 
Expended 
per Farm 


Rent and Board 
Furnished 
per Farm 


Cash, Rent, and 

BoardFurnished 

per Farm 


The State ,... 


$242.58 


$ 25.94 


$268.52 


Beaver 

Boxelder 

Cache 


179.94 
413.73 
197.32 
309.97 


33.60 

. 40.75 

20.16 

58.92 


213.54 
454.48 
217.48 
368.89 


Davis 


211.22 24.40 

270.15 82.84 

191.65 ! 2.56 

645.46 , 218.35 

400.47 33.08 

253.23 14.44 
507.29 5.77 
223.20 23.31 
187.25 19.31 
227.09 34.11 
774.00 . 206.11 
228.87 \ 15.24 
553.84 157.08 
173.63 13.20 
165.56 21.66 
421.78 68.96 
324.02 54.30 

212.16 48.15 
187.93 10.91 
182.06 21.88 
193.82 16.23 

168.66 38.91 
222 70 14.74 


235.62 
352.99 


Garfield 

Grand 

Iron 

Juab 

Kane _. 

Millard 


194.21 
863.81 
433.55 
267.67 
513.06 
246.51 


Morgan 

Piute 


206.56 
261.20 


Rich 

Salt Lake 

San Juan 

Sanpete 


980.11 
244.11 
710.92 
186.83 


Sevier 

Summit 

Tooele 

Uinta 

Utah 

Wasatch 

Washington 


187.22 
490.74 
378.32 
260.31 
198.84 
203.94 
210.05 


Wayne 

Weber 


207.57 
247.44 











Table XIX shows the average amount expended on each farm for 
hired labor, for each county in Utah, 1910(i)- In Cache county an 
average of $217.48 was expended as wages, rent, and board for hired 
lielp. This is about the same amount as was expended at Hyde Park in 
1916. 

Table XX shows the monthly and daily wages of farm labor, with 
and without board, in Utah from 1866 to 1918. By comparing the 
wages given in this table for farm labor and the wages of farm laborers 
for the Unile'd States as a whole one finds that on the average they are 
higher in Utah(-'). 

01910 U. S. Census. 

(-)U. S. D. A. Monthly Crop Report, (Dec, 1918), p. 146. 



36 Bulletin No. 177 

Table XX. — Wages of Farm Labor in Utah(i), 1866-191! 



Year 


Average Monthly 

Wages for Year 

or Season 


Average Daily 

Wages in 

Harvest 


Average Daily 
Wages Other 
Than Harvest ' 




Without 
Board 


With 
Board 


Without 
Board 


With 
Board 


Without 1 With 
Board | Board 


1866 


$44.71 ] $26.32 
35.50 25.33 
28.87 20.50 

- 1 

30 00 1 21.00 


$ 3.42 $ 2.49 
2.20 1.75 
1.82 1.43 

2.00 1.56 


$ 2.27 1 $ 1.63 
1.80 1 1.40 


1875 


1879 

1882 

1885 


1.46 1 1.12 
1.57 1 1.10 
1.52 1 1.14 


1888 


33.50 
32.30 
33.50 
33.29 
29.98 
29.81 
32.97 
34.43 
37.99 
56.12 
47.50 
68.00 
84.00 


22.30 
21.00 
22.30 
24.65 
21.16 
21.00 
24.41 
25.72 
29.45 
40.77 
35.00 
50.00 
64.00 


1.75 
1.72 
1.70 
1.80 
1.48 
1.32 
1.34 
1.57 
1.64 
1.92 
2.20 
3.25 
3.80 


1.36 
1.30 

1.27 
1.43 
1.22 
1.07 
1.05 
1.29 
1.36 
1.52 
1.78 
2.73 
3.15 


1.42 1 1.10 


1890 


1.38 1 1.05 


1892 

•1893 


1.40 1 1.08 
1.28 1 1.06 


1894 

1895 


1.14 1 .92 
118 1 90 


1898 


1 39 1 1 10 


1899 


1.48 1 1.22 


1902 


1 61 1 1 28 


1909(^) 

1910(3) 

1917(3) 

1918(3) 


I 1.61 

2.00 1 1.55 
3.00 1 2.42 
3.50 1 2.60 



In 1909 ten per cent of the male outdoor laborers on farms, hired at 

a monthly rate, were hired by the year(-). 

Table XXI shows the ratio of agricultural workers to the improved 
area in farms(2), 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910. 

Table XXI.— Ratio of Agricultural Workers to Improved Area 
of Farms 1880, 1890, 1900 and 1910, Utah 







Persons 10 Years 






Average 


Old and Over, 


Acres of Improved Land 




Improved 


Gainfully En- 


per Person 10 Years Old 


Year 


Acres 


gaged in Agri- 


and Over, Gainfully En- 




(Per Farm) 


culture 
(Per Farm) 


gaged in Agriculture 


1880 


44 


1.6 


28.6 


1890 


52 


1.9 


27.4 


1900 


53 


1.6 


35.3 


1909(4) . 


63 


1.7 


37.4 



It should be noted that there are on the average about the same 
number of men on each Hyde Park farm, as there are persons 10 years 
old and over gainfully engaged in agriculture in the State. There are 
about the same number of crop-acres to the man on the Hyde Park 

(i)U. S. D. A., Bureau of Statistics, Misc. Series, Bui. No. 26, (1903), 
pp. 14-22. 

(2)U. S. D. A., Bureau of Statistics, Misc. Series, Bui. No. 94, (Nov., 
1912). 

(3)U. S. D. A., Monthly Crop Report, (Dec, 1918). 

(*)1910, U. S. Census. 



Some Types of Irrigation Favmiiig in Utah 37 

farms as there are acres of improved land to each person 10 years old 
and over gainfully engaged in agriculture in the State. 

Markets. — Markets for farm products affect the type of farming. 
\Ttah is not advantageously situated with respect to world markets. It 
is a great distance to the central farm produce markets of the United 
States. Comparison of Utah farm prices with the average farm prices of 
the United States(i) as a whole, for the three ten-year periods, 1880-1889, 
1890-1899, and 1900-1909, shows that hay, wheat, barley, sugar-beets, 
and potatoes are lower in price in Utah; and that the prices of corn, 
oats, and rye are higher in Utah. The prices varied as follows: hay, 
$1.50 to ?;2.25 per ton less, wheat 2 to 6 cents per bushel less, barley 
to 5 cents per bushel less, sugar-beets 5 cents to $2.50 per ton less, and 
potatoes 6 to 8 cents per bushel less, in Utah than in the United States 
as a whole; and corn 16 to 30 cents per bushel higher, oats 10 to 15 
cents per bushel higher, and rye to 2 cents per bushel higher in Utah 
than the average for the entire country (See Table XXIX in Appendix). 

In general, the farm price is low for those products exported and 
high for those products imported; or, prices are low for products that 
are abundant and high for products that are scarce in relation to the 
local demand. 

Where the market cannot be adapted to the type of farming other- 
wise best for an area, the type of farming must be adapted to the 
market. 

Most of the very perishable products such as fruits and vegetables 
must be consumed near home and therefore have a limited market(-). 
Not only is our fruit-haul to market a long one but Utah peaches come 
on the market in competition with those of southern Michigan. The 
Michigan neaches have a decided advantage because they do not have 
to stand the costs. of long transportation. In recent years the canning 
of many of these perishables has widened the market for them. This 
is especially true of tomatoes and peas. As a result of this wider market 
more tomatoes and peas are grown on Utah farms. 

The milk market has been widened as a result of the development 
of condensed milk factories, crearrteries, and cheese factories. Because 
of this wider market more dairy cows are kept on farms. The surplus 
milk from Hyde Park farms is usually marketed at one of three places: 
(\^ the branch factory of the Utah Condensed Milk Company, at Smith- 
field. (2) Borden's Condensed Milk Factory, at Logan, or (3) the Utah 
Agricultural College Creamery, at Logan. 

Early each morning large milk wagons gather the milk cans from 
the homes about town. They deliver the milk to the factories and return 
with the cans, butter, and. if the milk is sent to a creamery, skim milk. 
These are left at the homes about 2:00 p. m. Some farmers have cream 
separators and usually send only cream to the creamery. After the cans 
are emptied at the factories they are washed and steamed before they 
are put back on the wagons. A regular rate for each hundred pounds 
or for onch can of milk is charged for hauling. This cost is usually de- 
ducted from the farmers' milk checks at the factories and paid directly 
to the milk haulers. 

In the past the meat animals have been shipped to the great meat- 
packing centers. At present most of the hogs and some sheep and cat- 
tle are marketed to advantage at Salt Lake City and Ogden, where pack- 
ing plants are now in operation. 

Hay. a very bulky product, has been shipped as far as Omaha and 
Kansas City, and often as far as Butte, Montana. There is not much 

0)U. S. D. A. Yearbook. 1917, Dec. 1, Farm Prices from 1880 to 
1917. U. S. D. A. Bu. of Stat. Bui. No. 94. (Nov., 1912). 

(-')Connor. L. G.. U. S. D. A. Bui. No. 582 (1918), pp. 35-36. 



38 



Bulletin No. 177 



shipped out of the State at present and because of the limited agricul- 
tural area of the State it is probable that hay as well as some other 
agricultural products will be imported in considerable quantities in the 
near future. Most of the Hyde Park hay is consumed at Hyde Park, 
Logan and Smithfield. 

The sugar-beets are unloaded from the farmers' wagons onto cars or 
at the beet-dump at Hyde Park spur. From here they are shipped to 
the sugar factory at Logan, the erection of which made it possible for 
the farmers of this area to grow sugar-beets as a cash crop. The farm- 
ers are thus dependent upon the factory for a cash market, and in turn 
the factory is dependent upon the farmers for the beets. Potatoes are 
usually not grown in large commercial quantities at Hyde Park. Most 
of them are marketed either at Jiyde Park or hauled to Logan or 
Smithfield. 

Small-grains are easily shipped great distances to central markets 
and the Hyde Park grain is hauled to the Logan mills, to the Smithfield 
mills, or to the Hyde Park Spur and shipped to other markets. Each 
farmer's convenience and bargaining determine his methods of marketing, 

Wagon and Auto Roads and Rail- 
roads. — The State Road, which is the 
main auto road running north and 
south, passes thru the western part 
of Hyde Park Township and in gen- 
eral divides the meadow and pasture 
land on the west from the sugar-beet 
and jpotato land on the east. The 
center of the town of Hyde Park is 
situated about % mile east of this 
State Road. The Utah-Idaho Central 
Electric Railroad passes thru the cen- 
ter of town. The Hyde Park Spur is 
1 ^2 miles west ' from town on the 
Cache Valley Branch of the Oregon 
Short Line Railroad. Such markets 
as are available, are accessible to 
Hyde Park farmers by good wagon 
and auto roads and railroads. The 
fact that Hyde Park is on a branch 
line of the Oregon Short Line Rail- 
road is a handicap in shipping to 
distant markets. (See Figure 20.) 

Land Tenure. — By land tenure is 
meant the relationship of the farmers 
to the land which they operate. Land tenure is inseparably connected 
with type of farming(i). At Hyde Park most of the land which is now 
irrigated has been under cultivation for from 40 to 60 years. During 
the last 20 years the bench land east of town has been developed by 
dry-farming methods. The farm buildings are all in town where the 
farm families live. The farms in this area include, (1) dry-farm land 
on the bench, (2) irrigated land for cultivated crops west of the bench 
land, and (3) still farther west towards the center of the valley, meadow 
and pasture land. Most of the farms include some of each of these 
three distinct types of land. This condition makes possible a greater 
diversity of farm business on these farms and is one of the factors con- 
tributing to the prosperity of the area. 

None of the 52 farms of which records were obtained in 1914 were 




l*ig. 2 0. — Railroads, Auto Roads 
and National Forests, Utah, 
(after Clayson's Guide Map) 



(i)Hibbard, B. H., "Tenancy in the United States", in Carver's 
"Readings in Rural Economics", pp. 498 to 546; and Holmes, G. K., 
Ibid pp. 487 to 497, "Tenancy in the United States". 



Some Tijpes of Irrigation Farming in Utah 39 

tenant farms, but 23 of the 52 owners rented additional land, 18 pay- 
ing cash rent for it. 3 renting on shares, and 2 paying cash for pasture 
and hay land and a share of the crop for the cultivated land. ^This Is 
unusual because in Cache County generally share tenancy is most com- 
mon. It must be remembered, however, that these farmers are not 
tenants but owners renting additional pieces of land. Since they have 
money to pay the cash for rent it is to their advantage to do so, for 
thus they get all of the produce. There were 184.5 acres rented for 
(ash, for which $1,685 was paid, or an average of $9.13 per acre. Pas- 
ture rent was about $2 to $3 per acre and cultivated crop land ranged 
from $7 to $21 per acre, the latter being paid for an unusually good 
piece of sugar-beet land. Twenty-one acres was the largest piece of this 
irrigated land rented for cash. One piece of 360 acres of dry-farm 
land was rented for $860 cash. Two other pieces of dry-farm land 
amounting to 258 acres were rented on shares, the tenants getting six- 
tenths of the wheat crop. One piece of 128 acres of irrigated land was 
rented on shares. The tenant received one-half the hay and oats raised 
on the piece. Two other pieces -were rented and the tenant received a 
trifle more than half the wheat in the one case and five-ninths of the 
alfalfa in the other. One young man had the use of 5 acres of his 
father's land and had all the crop. Another farmer, in addition to his 
own land, managed the family estate. He kept his aged mother and 
father and had all that he made from the estate. (See Tables III In 
Text and XXX in Appendix). 

In 1914 the personal and property taxes amount to about 0.6 per 
cent and the water taxes amounted to about 0.2 per cent of the total 
farm capital investment. As a general rule the landlord or owner of 
the rented land or water pays the taxes. Land and water may be 
rented separately or together. (See Table XXX in Appendix). 

On the average the 52 Hyde Park farmers have been owners of farms 
20.7 years, and owners of the farms which they now operate 18.5 
years. Those who have rented land at all have been tenants on the 
average for 4.7 years, and on the average they have been tenants of 
the land Avhich they now rent in addition to their own land for 3.6 years. 
The land is rented for the purpose of increasing the size of the business 
and no doubt here as elsewhere is an intermediate step in the process 
of becoming owners of the land operated. 

The small percentage of tenancy here is due to a number of cir- 
cumstances and conditions. The country is new and it has been easy 
to become a farm owner without tenancy, by (1) horaesteading or (2) 
purchasing. The farms are comparatively small and therefore the total 
capital necessary to purchase a farm is not so great as to make pur- 
chasing prohibitive to those who are moderately well-to-do. The type 
of farming followed is one that is conducive to ownership and compared 
with the farming of the North Central States is less attractive to 
tenants and less adaptable to tenant farming. Land has increased 
enormously in value. This has been a great incentive to farmers to own 
their own farms. These facts largely account for the present low per- 
centage of tenant farmers at Hyde Park as well as in Cache County and 
the State. 

In 1910(1) the approximate total land area of Cache County was 
744,960 acres, 294,160 acres in farms, 181,348 acres improved land 
in farms, 5,779 acres of woodland in farms, 107,033 acres of other un- 
improved land in farms, and 450,800 acres of land not in farms. Thus 
40 per cent of the land was in farms in 1910 and 62 per cent of this 
farm land was improved. There were 1,907 farms in the county with 
an average of 154.3 acres per farm, of which 95.1 acres were improved. 



(1)1910 U. S. Census. 



40 



Bulletin No. 177 



As late as July 1, 1918, there were still 239,918 acres of land in 
the county unappropriated and unreserved, of which 12,381 acres were 
surveyed and 227,537 acres were unsurveyed(i ). 

Of the 52,597,760 acres of land in Utah(2), 31,475,919 acres, or 
6 per cent, were unappropriated and unreserved on July 1, 1918 (i)' 
This land is described as "generally arid, agricultural, mineral, graz- 
ing, and mountainous.',' Of this amount, 14,010,343 acres were sur- 
veyed and 17,465,576 acres were unsurveyed. 

In the 9 years from 1909 to July 1, 1918, there were in Utah 
5,175,143 acres of public land entered for settlement. This is an 
average of 575,016 acres each year. In 1910(2) there were only 3,397,699 
acres in farms in the State and 1,368,211 acres of farm land improved. 
In the 9 years, 1910 to July 1, 1918 (i) there was 69 per cent more land 
entered for settlement than there was land in farms, and more than 
four times as many acres as there was improved land in farms, April 
15, 1910. 

Of the 2 84,02 8,210 acres of unappropriated and unreserved lands of 
the 11 far Western Range States, July 1,' 1914, it is estimated that only 
12 per cent, or 34,080,000 acres were suitable for agricultural settle- 
ment under the then existing laws(3). Since July 1, 1914, three 
amendments to the Desert Land Laws (4) have been passed and the 
Stock-Raising Homesteads-Act of December 2 9, 1916(5) has become 
operative. Undoubtedly these laws have made it practicable to settle 
more of this land than it was wise to settle before their enactment. 

Table XXII shows the number of farms, the average size of farm, 
and the relationship of the farmers to the land which they operate 
Cache County, Utah, 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910. 

Table XXII. — Tenure of Farms, Cache County, Utah, 
1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910(2) 



Year 



1880 
1890 
1900 
1910 



Number 

of 
Farms 



Average 

Size 
(Acres) 



I 998 I 85 

I 1,065 I 94 

I 1,795 i 176.4 

I 1,907 I 154.3 



Number Farms Operated by 
Own- 
Part ers 
Owners Own- and 
ers Ten- 
ants 



943 j 

979 I 

1,446 I 236 

1,756 I 



Man- 
agers 



Percentage of 


Farms Op- 


erated by 


Own- 


Ten- 


ers 


ants 


94.5 |. 5.5 


91.9 1 8.1 


80.6 1 5.1 


92.1 1 


7.3 



Over 92 per cent of the farms were operated by the owners in 1910 
and only 7.3 per cent by tenants. Tenancy does not seem to be in- 
creasing in ti.e County. The figures show a smaller percentage of the 
farms operated by owners in 1910 than in 18 80, but a greater percent- 
age of them operated by tenants in 18 90 than in 1910. Share tenancy 
always has been and is now the most common form. (See Table XXIII.) 

(i)U. S. D. I., G. L. O., Cir. No. 608, (July, 1918). 
(2)1910 U. S. Census. 

(3)U. S. D. A., Off. of Sec. Rpt. No. 110, Part II, (July 1, 1916). 
pp. 17-18. 

(OU. S. D. I., G. L. O. Cir. No. 474. (May 18, 1916). 
(3)U. S. D. I., G. L. O. Cir. No. 523, (Jan. 27, 1917). 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



41 



Table XXIII. — Number and Kinds of Tenants, Cache County, Utah, 
1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910(i) 



Year 





Number and Ki 


nds of Tenants 


Total 


Share 1 Cash [Share and Cash | Not Specified 


1880 


55 

86 

91 

139 


33 1 22 1 
55 31 1 

1 76 15 1 
1 59 35 1 




1890 




1900 


1 


1910 


11 1 34 



The explanation of conditions as found in Table XXIII is the same 
as that given for the conditions at Hyde Park. 

Table XXIV shows the total area, area in farms, and the area of 
farm land improved in the State, and in each county, arranged accord- 
ing to the acres of improved farm land, 1909. Cache County had 
the greatest and Grand County the smallest area improved. 

Table XXIV. — Total Land Area, Land in Farms, and Improved 
Land in Farms, by Counties, Utah, 1909 (i) 



Acres 



Improved land 
in farms 



All land in 
farms 



Total 
area 



State 



1,368,211 



3,397,699 | 52,597,760 



County 

1. Cache 

2. Boxelder .... 

3. Utah 

4. Salt Lake.... 

5. Sanpete 

6^ Rich 

7. Weber 

8. Sevier 

9. Davis 

10. Millard 

11. Juab 

12. Wasatch 

13. Emery 

14. Uinta 

15. Tooele 

16. Summit ...... 

17.. Beaver 

18. Garfield 

19. Iron 

20. Piute 

21. Carbon 

22. Washington 

23. Morgan 

24. Wayne 

25. Kane 

26. San Juan 

27. Grand , 



181,348 

142,922 

124,496 

121,221 

105,807 

81,779 

59,781 

56,338 

55,376 

54.540 

53,466 

43,220 

39,386 

35,748 

34,239 

32,645 

19,354 

19,109 

17,934 

16,964 

13,824 

13,632 

11,691 

11,538 

8,685 

6,698 

6.470 



294,160 

343,185 

234,717 

169,262 

261,771 

149,509 

148,359 

122,332 

127,257 

166,627 

108,564 

154,083 

96,708 

82,072 

88,332 

261,056 

35,986 

59,973 

88,027 

25,869 

56,653 

50,273 

95,648 

31,617 

24,773 

48,797 

62,089 



744,960 
3,484,160 
1,301,760 

483,840 
1,000,960 

657,280 

340,240 
1,265,920 

176,000 
4,226,560 
2,182,400 
2,786,560 
2,849,920 
3,350,400 
4,383,360 
1,191,680 
1,702,400 
3,349,760 
2,083,840 

488,320 

951,680 
1,577,600 

400,640 
1,584,000 
2,697,600 
4,967,040 
2,362.880 



01910 U. S. Census. 



42 Bulletin No. 177 

Table XXV shows the percentage of all farms operated by the own- 
ers, part owners, and tenants in Utah, 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910 as 
given by the U. S. Census Reports. 

Table XXV. — Percentage of Tenancy, Utah, 1880-1910 



Year 



Per cent of all Farms Operated by 





Managers 1 


Owners 


and Part 


wners 


Tenants 


1880 


1.6 1 
.9 




95.4 
94.8 
89.6 
91.2 




4.6 


1890 


5.2 


1900 


8.8 


1910 


7.9 







The explanation of the tenancy conditions of the State as shown in 
Table XXV is the same as that of the conditions at Hyde Park. (See 
Tables XXXI to XXXVI in Appendix). 

Land Values. — Land values are largely determined by type of farming. 
The agricultural value of a piece of land is the capitalized agricultural 
income of that land with all future increases discounted to date; and 
the income of the land is obviously a result of the type of farming 
practised (1). 

The individual farmer must follow a type of farming that is profit- 
able on land of a given value. Land which can be rented profitably for 
$20 an acre for producing sugar-beets will not be rented for $3 an acre 
and used for pasture, except in unusual and rare cases. The value of 
the land will be based upon the $20 and not the $3. And as long as 
there are men who want the land for sugar-beets and can afford to pay 
$20 an aero for it, other men as a rule will not be so unwise, for any 
length of time, as to pay $20 for such land and use it as pasture when 
such use will not be profitable for any rent above $3. 

The factors affecting land values are too numerous to mention here. 
Only a general analysis is given. Before 1847 land in Utah had little 

Table XXVI. — Total Value of Land and Buildings, and Value of 

Land and Buildings per Farm and per Acre, 52 Farms, 

Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 



Total Acres in all 52 Farms 5,434 

Average number acres per farm 105 

Total Value of Land and Buildings (2) $577,815 

Value of Land and Buildings per Farm 11,112 

Value of Land and Buildings per Acre 106 

Total Value of Land 478,500 

Value of Land per Farm 9,202 

Value of Land per Acre.... 88 

Total Value of Buildings _ 99,315 

Value of all Buildings per Farm (in Town) 1,910 

Value of all Buildings per Acre 18 

Value of Dwellings per Farm(2) 1,284 

Value of other Buildings per Farm 626 

(i)Taylor, H. C. — Agricultural Economics, (1914), ch. 10, pp. 
185 — 197, Macmillan Co., N. Y. 

(2) Reports on the value of dwellings were obtained from 50 farms 
only. The average value of dwellings for the 50 farms reporting was 
$1,335. 



Some. Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



43 



or no agricultural value. Such as it might have had was based upon 
its prospective future use. As the State became populated, land came 
to have a value based upon its productivity. This value increased as 
population became more dense and the land more developed and 
improved. 

Comparison of Hyde Park values as given in Table XXVI vi'ith those 
for Cache County and the State, given in Tables XXVIII, XXIX and XXX 
shows this area to be much better than the average. It has been settled 
longer and is more developed than many sections of the state. 

It is impossible to show from the records obtained the changes in 
land values at Hyde Park. The 1915 and 1916 farm values were raised 
or lowered by the farmers as determined more by the accuracy of their 
1914 estimate than by the actual changes in the market value of the 
land. 

Table XXVII was made in order to determine the correlation between 
distance to market and the value of farm land per acre in each of the 
7 districts in which farm business records were taken in 1914. 



Table XXVII.— Distance 


from 


Market and 


Land 


Values per Acre 




in 


7 Areas, Utah, 1914 












Distance from Market i 


n Miles ^ 






On 


to 


1 to 


1 2 tol 


3 to| 


4 to| 


5 to] 


6 &| Aver- 




Place 


.9 


1.9 


1 2.9 1 


3.9 1 


4.9 


5.9 


Over 1 age 


Value of land per 








1 1 


1 


1 




1 


Acre at Beaver. ... 


$41 


$ 58 


$ 45 


$ 66 1$ 371$ 76|$ ....|'$104|$ .... 


Value of land per 








1 1 








1 


Acre at Hyde Park 


65 


150 


32 


92 1 




168| 


50| 


220] 88. 


Value of land per 








1 










Acre at Wellington 


.... 


47 


37 


55 1 


40| 


....| 






Value of land per 








1 










Acre at Ferron.... 


32 


37 


62 


30 1 








30| .... 


Value of land per 








1 










Acre at Hinckley.. 


35 


64 


63 


.... 1 


85| 


74| 


44| 


41] .... 


Value of land per 








1 










Acre at Sandy 


76 


140 


197 


195 1 


111| 


88| 


108| 


126] .... 


Value of land per 








1 1 








1 


Acre at Monroe 


.... 


95 


111 


135 I 


85 1 


89| 


83| 


74] .... 



There seems to be no correlation between distance to market and 
value of land per acre as given in Table XXVII. The difficulty is that 
other factors are more important, and therefore the correlation which 
undoubtedly exists is not visible. Those farms nearest to market have 
an advantage in marketing. Land values are certain to be high there 
because of this advantage. The average value of land per acre at Hyde 
Park in 1914 was $88. This is $50 higher than the average value for 
Cache County and $59 higher than the average value of land in the 
State in 1910. At Hyde Park farm products are readily marketed as 
explained in a previous paragraph. Consequently better soil may offset 
easily the advantage of nearness to market. The fact that there are too 
few farms in the groups makes Table XXVII of little value except in 
indicating the method of observation. 

Table XXVIII shows the percentage of land in farms and farm land 
improved and land value per acre, by counties, for Utah on April 15, 
1910. The counties are arranged according to the percentage of farm 
land improved. 



44 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XXVIII. — Percentage of Land in Farms and Farm Land 
Improved and Land Value per Acre, by Counties, Utah, 1910 (i) 



State 



County 

1. Salt Lake 

2. Piute 

3. Cache 

4. Rich 

5. Utah 

6. Juab 

7. Sevier 

8. Uinta 

9. Davis 

10. Beaver 

11. Boxelder 

12. Emery 

13. Sanpete 

14. Weber 

15. Tooele 

16. Wayne 

17. Kane 

18. Millard 

19. Garfield 

20. Wasatch 

21. Washington 

22. Carbon 

23. Iron 

24. San Juan.... 

25. Summit 

26. Morgan 

27. Grand 



Percentage of 



Farm Land 
Improved 



Land Area 
in Farms 



Land Valu6 
per Acre 



40.3 



71.6 
65.6 
61.6 
54.7 
53.0 
49.3 
46.1 
43.6 
43.5 
42.1 
41.6 
40.7 
40.4 
40.3 
38.8 
36.5 
35.1 
32.7 
31.9 
28.1 
27.1 
24.4 
20.4 
13.7 
12.5 
12.2 
10.4 



6.5 



35.0 

5.3 

39.5 

22.7 

18.0 

5.0 

9.7 

2.4 

72.3 

2.7 

9.8 

3.4 

26.2 

42.8 

2.0 

2.0 

0.9 

3.9 

1.8 

5.5 

3.2 

6.0 

4.2 

1.0 

21.9 

23.9 

2.6 



I $29.28 



78.34 
23.51 
37.85 

9.32 
58.27 
18.95 
32.67 
25.89 
61.41 
25.33 
28.25 
26.75 
19.91 
50.55 
24.80 
12.91 
11.45 
18.51 
11.87 
17.86 
18.39 
15.05 
13.37 
10.99 

7.71 
12.32 
18.42 



In constructing Table XXIX the 27 counties oi the State were di- 
vided in four groups according to the percentage of farm land improved. 
This table shows that there is a correlation as expected between the use 



Table 



XXIX. — Relation of Improved Farm Land to Value of All 
Farm Land Per Acre, Utah, 1910 (i) 



Group (2) 




Percentage of 

Farm Land 

Improved 

(Average) 



Percentage of 
Land Area 
in Farms 
(Average) 



Value of all 

Land 

Per Acre 

(Average) 



19.3 

22.8 
2.8 
9.9 



$36.99 
34.01 
16.54 
12.98 



(i)Adapted from 1910 U. S. Census, Supplement for Utah, Table 1, 
pp. 612-614. 

(^) Groups are based upon percentage of farm land improved as shown 
in Table 2 5. Group. 1 has the 7 counties with the greatest percentage 
and Group 4 the least percentage of farm land improved. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farnwig in Utah 



45 



of land and its value. In general, the value of farm land is highest in 
those counties where the population is most dense and the greatest 
percentage of farm land is improved. (See Figure 19). 

Table XXX shows the average values per acre of farm land, build- 
ings, machinery, and livestock, by counties, Utah, April 15, 1910(0. 

This table is useful in connection with this study in comparing the 
counties with each other and the average of the State. 

Table XXI shows the average value of land and buildings per acre 
by counties, Utah, Census Years, 1860 to 1910. 

Table XXX. — Average Values per Acre of Farm Land, Buildings, 
Machinery, and Livestock, by Counties, Utah(i), 1909 



I Land | Buildingsl 

I I I 



Implements | 

and 1 

Machinery | 



Domestic 

Animals, Poultry 

and Bees 



The State. 



$29.28 I $5.32 | $1.32 



$8.46 



County 

1. Salt Lake.... 

2. Davis 

3. Utah 

4. Weber 

5. Cache 

6. Sevier 

7. Boxelder 

8. Emery 

9. Uinta 

10. Beaver 

11. Tooele 

12. Piute 

13. Sanpete 

14. Juab 

15. Millard 

16. Grand 

17. Washington 

18. W^asatch 

19. Carbon 

?0. Iron 

21. Wayne 

22. Morgan 

23. Garfield 

24. Kane 

25. San Juan.... 

'>6. Rich 

27. Summit 



78.34 
61.41 
58.27 
50.55 
37.85 
32.67 
28.25 
26.75 
25.89 
25.33 
24.80 
23.51 
19.91 
18.95 
18.51 
18.42 
18.39 
17.86 
15.05 
13.37 
12.91 
12.32 
11.87 
11.45 
10.99 
9.32 
7.71 




9.97 

6.62 

10.17 

6.72 

6.82 

10.82 

6.59 

7.44 

11.12 

11.33 

6.81 

10.32 

8.84- 

7.50' 

5.69 

13.97 

15.95 

9.12 

7.65 

13.79 

16.61 

3.79 

17.28 

29.34 

18.67 

6.67 

3.42 



In general the value of land and buildings per acre has increased 
each successive census period. The value in 1900 shows a decrease be- 
cause much grazing land of low value was included as farm land in the 
census of 1900 and this lowered greatly the average value of farm land 
per acre. 

As population increases or the relative prices of farm products rise 
or interest rates become lower the land is more thoroughly and intensively 
utilized and land values become greater. Land values also rise when the 
relative value of the dollar decreases. 

AVater Tenure, — At Hyde Park about two-thirds of the crop land is 
irrigated and the other one-third is dry-farm land. Most of the Hyde 



(1)1910 U. S. Census 



46 



Bulletin No. 177 



Park land that can be irrigated is now irrigated. Either the water supply 
or the location of the land limits extension of the area. Above the 
Logan, Hyde Park, and Smithfield canal there is some bench land for 
which there is no water. This is now dry-farmed to good advantage. 

Three canal systems from Logan River supply the irrigation watfer 
for Hyde Park: (1) Logan and Hyde Park Canal, (2) Logan and Rich- 
mond Canal, and (3) the Logan, Hyde Park and Smithfield Canal. (See 
Fig. 21. 



Table XXXI. 



-Average Value of Land and Buildings per Acre, 
by Counties, Utah, Census Years 



i 1910 I 



1890 



1870 



1860 



State 



$34.60 I $12.33 I $21. 4( 



$21.38 I $15.49 I $14.82 



Counties 

Beaver 

Boxelder ... 

Cache 

Carbon 

Davis -- 

Emery 

Garfield 

Grand ..-. 

Iron 

Juab 

Kane ---. 

Millard 

Morgan 

Piute -.- 

Rich, 

Salt Lake... 

San Juan 

Sanpete 

Sevier 

Summit 

Tooele 

Uinta 

Utah 

Wasatch 

Washington 

Wayne 

Weber 



29.42 
32.48 
44.68 
17.16 
74.65 
30.80 
14.75 
20.69 
14.13 
20.74 
16.90 
21.75 
15.23 
27.92 
10.79 
93.47 
13.46 
23.72 
36.95 
9.45 
31.12 
80.86 
67.99 
21.05 
23.13 
16.93 
61.26 



20.14 

5.52 
15.61 

8.41 
16.71 
14.36 
13.09 
20.68 
13.95 
12.06 
14.95 
15.81 

4.57 
11.22 

6.37 
30.80 

5.64 
20.56 
22.03 

5.06 
10.67 

3.38 
29.79 

9.35 
34.36 

9.56 
21.89 



14.10 

5.53 

20.29 

35.44 
12.83 
15.17 
14.41 
14.45 
15.17 
19.57 
8.12 
26.11 
10.55 
10.26 
82.11 
13.48 
21.42 
15.49 
20.36 
23.02 
17.13 
41.83 
18.66 
39.32 

6.18 



22.98 
17.90 
17.52 

20.20 
1.50 



24.28 
37.95 
28.33 
15.66 
20.51 

2.76 

8.37 
37.66 

3.94 
21.66 

9.42 
11.02 
24.19 

2.33 
24.81 
15.83 
44.34 

2.38 



10.17 

11.80 

9.75 



8.08 I 
10.15 I 
30.66 I 

7.94 I 
20.39 I 
i 



11.33 
35.24 i 



15.88 I 

8.42 I 

4.28 I 

42.35 I 



12.85 I 

4.74 I 

30.71 I 

I 



7.54 
17.96 
15.99 



40.45 I 28.02 

I 

I 



15.29 I 



5.77 



17.01 
8.37 

20.28 

28.52 
17.94 



Irrigation from the Logan River began in 1860. Soon afterward the 
Logan and Hyde Park canal was begun. In 18 64 the Logan and Rich- 
mond Canal was begun. This latter canal now supplies water for land 
above or east of the Logan and Hyde Park Canal. The Logan and Rich- 
mond Canal was not completed until 1877 (i). Twice since then it has 
been enlarged. The Logan, Hyde Park, and Smithfield Canal made its 
first appropriation of water in 1882 (-'). The first 7,000 feet of this canal 
is constructed on a steep mountain side necessitating considerable rock 
work, and its course is very much higher in elevation than either of the 
other canals. It shall therefore be referred to hereafter as the High Line 
Canal in contrast with the Upper and Lower Canals. 

(i)Swenson, G. L. — U. S. D. A. Bui. No. 86 (1900), pp. 197-218. 
(2)Swenson, G. L. — U. S. D. A. Bui. No. 104 (1902), pp. 179-194. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



47 



The Logan and Richmond Canal, or Upper Canal, supplies sufficient 
water on the average to irrigate about 3,186 acres and the Logan, Hyde 
Park, and Smithfield Canal, or High Line Canal, about 3,200 acres. The 
Upper Canal system is owned and managed by the farmers organized as 
an irrigation company under the law passed in 1865, and the High Line 
Canal system is owned and operated by the farmers organized as a stock 
company. 

In both canals water-rights were obtained in payment for services in 
constructing them or bought from the original owners. In the Upper 

Canal a water-right "entitles one to 
sufficient water to irrigate a certain 
number of acres, a very variable and 
uncertain quantity; but in the High 
Line Canal a water-right entitles 
one to only his proportion of the 
available irrigation water, a more 
variable and uncertain amount; and 
the division is made on the basis of 
shares of stock held in the company. 
In neither case does the right specify 
an exact quantity of water. This 
lack of specification has advantages 
and disadvantages. However, it is 
impossible to discuss them here. 

A claim to sufficient water to 
irrigate one acre cost the original 
owners of the Upper Canal $18 to 
$20 and about 50 cents annually per 
acre irrigated for operation and 
maintenance of the canal system. 
Only one-third of the 50 cents per 
acre charge is required in cash. T'he 

i i r^ i I , fj^ ijAijjja'^ ga m^— L_y | l other two-thirds may be paid in 

7VTV I •«->^" : Wm^^^^^^ labor. The original shares in the 

High Line Canal cost $5 each and 
the annual maintenance and opera- 
tion of the canal system cost about 
50 cents per share. 

The best way to express the duty 
of water is in inches or cubic feet 
per second when the water is not 
stored, but when the water is stored 
it is best expressed in acre-feet. It 
is better to express it in acre-feet 
per acre and not in a fraction of an acre per acre-foot. When a stream 
is discharging one cubic foot of water every second of time there is a 
second-foot flow. A second-foot stream discharges approximately one 
acre-inch per hour, one acre-foot in twelve hours, two acre-feet in 
twe;ity-four hours (one day), and two hundred forty acre-feet in the 
four months. May 1 to August 31, inclusive(i). 

The duty of water under the High Line Canal was about sixty acres 
per cubic foot per second in 1900, and the duty under the Upper Canal 
was about sixty-two acres per cubic foot per second including loss from 
seepage and evaporation from the canal and forty-seven acres not in- 
cluding this loss. The duty may be greatly increased by the time 




Fig. 21. — Three Canals that Supply 
Irrigation Water for Hyde Park 
Farms, Cache County, Utah, 
(after G. L. Swenson) 



(i)Winsor, L. M. — Utah Exp. Sta. Cir. No. 
O. W. — Utah Exp. Sta. Cir. No. 3 6 (1919). 



(1912); and Israelsen, 



48 Bulletin No. 177 

method of distribution under which each acre-right entitles the person 
to the use of an "irrigating stream" for a specified number of hours. 

Water masters are elected by the owners of each system. These 
water masters have complete supervision over the water distribution. 
There are but few gauges or measuring devices, and headagate boxes 
are of variable sizes. Tho "irrigating streams" are supposed to be equal, 
they are not. The equivalent of an "irrigating stream," as measured, 
ranged from 0.85 to 3.12 cubic feet per second (i). The splendid success 
of these canals has been due to (1) the general spirit of cooperation 
among the water users, and (2) the type of men who have managed 
the distribution of the water. 

A good irrigating stream for the average man under average condi- 
tions is from 2 to 5 second-feet(^). Three to five acre-inches is enough 
for a good irrigation. Two and one-half acre-feet is the maximum 
needed in Utah, in addition to the precipitation to produce a crop, if it 
is applied at the proper season between May 1 and August 31, inclusive. 
One second-foot will irrigate 70 to 160 acres in the four months of the 
irrigating season. 

In Cache County, as in all parts of the State, water tenure, water- 
rights, and the operation and management of the canal systems are of 
prime importance. In 1910(3) there were 1,907 farms in Cache County, 
1,501 (*) or 79 per cent of which were irrigated. The approximate land 
area of the county was 744,960 acres. There were 294,160 acres in 
farms, 181,348 acres — not including wild grass land — improved, and 
77,330 acres — including wild grass land — irrigated. The land irrigated 
was 10.4 per cent of the total land area, 26.3 per cent of the land in 
farms, and 42.6 per cent of the improved land in farms. In 1910 the 
irrigation enterprises were capable of irrigating only 82,503 acres, but 
119,304 acres were included in the projects. There were 62,230 acres 
irrigated by cooperative enterprises (s). These same enterprises were 
capable of irrigating 63,767 acres and included 97,521 acres. The re- 
mainder of the land was irrigated under the following projects: (1) 
irrigation districts(G), 8,455 acres; (2) individual and partnership en- 
terprises("), 5,623 acres; and (3) commercial enterprises («), 1,022 

(i)Swenson, G. L. — U. S. D. A. Bui. No. 104 (1902), pp. 179-218. 

(2)Winsor, L. M. — Utah Exp. Sta. Cir. No. 6 (1912). 

,(3)U. S. Census (1910) 

(^)Ibid. — "Tlie number of 'farms irrigated' is the number of farms 
on which irrigation is practised, and is equivalent to the term 'number 
of irrigators' which was used in previous census reports." 

(5)Ibid. — "Cooperative enterprises are those which are controlled by 
the water users under some organized form of cooperation. The most 
common form of organization is the stock company, the stock of which 
is owned by the water users.'' 

('•■)U. S. Census (1910) — "Irrigation districts are public corporations 
that operate under state laws providing for their organization and man- 
agement, and empowering them to issue bonds and levy and collect taxes 
with the object of obtaining funds for the purchase or construction, and 
for the operation and maintenance of irrigation works." 

(')Ibid. — "Individual partnership enterprises belong to individual 
farmers or to neighboring farmers, who control them without formal 
organization. It is not always possible to distinguish between partner- 
ship and cooperative enterprises, but as the difference is slight this is 
unimportant." 

(s)Ibid. — "Commercial enterprises supply water for compensation to 
parties who own no interest in the works. Persons obtaining water from 
such enterprises are usually required to pay for the right to receive water, 
and to pay, in addition, annual charges based in some instances on the 
acreage irrigated and in others on the quantity of water received." 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 49 

acres. The source of the water supply for irrigation was as follows: 
(1) streams, by gravity, 73,369 acres; (2) springs, 3,916 acres; and 
(3) flowing wells, 45 acres. There were 137 independent irrigation 
enterprises having 139 main ditches, with a combined length of 324 
miles and a combined capacity of 1,393 cubic feet per second. There 
were 153 laterals with a combined length of 142 miles. Other sources 
of water are: one reservoir, filled by collecting storm water or by a 
water course that is ordinarily dry, of 1,566 acre-feet capacity; and 
thirty-three flowing-wells of 734 gallons per minute capacity. The cost 
of all irrigation enterprises reporting costs, as reported by the 1910 
census, up to July 1, 1910, was |304,285. The average cost of con- 
struction per acre that enterprises were capable of irrigating in 1910 
was $3.69. The estimated final cost of existing enterprises was $304,285, 
or an average of $2.55 per acre included in the projects. The cost of 
operation and maintenance was reported for 63,507 acres and amounted 
to .'t>26,974, or an average of 42 cents per acre. 

Water was formerly personal property in Utah(i) and rights were 
sold, ex!;hanged, and leased with little regard for lormalities — and often 
without making any official record of the transactions. Whei a farmer 
found that his water-right furnished him more water than he needed, 
he sold a part of it outright, or rented a part of it by the year to some 
neighbor, or he bought another piece of land and transferred a part of 
his water-right to it. A ditch company could rent or sell a part of its 
rights to some other ditch company.. 

And even now not all the irrigators of Utah have definite, undisputed, 
legally defined titles to water. Often the seller does not know what he 
is selling, nor the buyer what he is buying. The water transferred is 
supposed to irrigate a certain number of acres. It may irrigate more 
or less, depending upon the available supply in the streams and upon 
how the water master divides it. 

Only recently has any attempt been made to measure out any certain 
quantity of water. The water of but few of the streams is divided ac- 
curately. The records of water-rights are now entered in the office of 
the State Engineer who also issues all permits to appropriate water. The 
rights of appropriations now issued by the State Engineer state speci- 
fically in feet and inches the amount of water included, but it is a diffi- 
cult task to determine how much water to allow permits for in the 
various streams, because the volume of water in the streams varies 
greatly from year to year and from season to season. However, inves- 
tigations and experience have given a body of quite accurate informa- 
tion for the most important streams of the State. 

The foregoing discussion shows clearly how water tenure affects the 
type of irrigation farming. Water is almost as important in determin- 
ing type of farming as land. While perhaps not more than 10 per cent 
of the land in Utah will ever be cultivated, yet if even this area is farmed 
profitably it will be possible only by irrigation. 

Irrigation Practice. — On the farm lands at Hyde Park the custom is 
to use the water whenever and wherever it may be needed up to the 
limit of the supply. The average irrigating season is 110 to 120 days 
in May, June, July, August, and September. There are two methods of 
applying the water: (1) flooding the whole surface, used in irrigating 
(a) wheat, (b) oats, (c) alfalfa, (d) hay, (e) corn, and (f) orchards; 
and (2) the furrow method which is used in irrigating (a) sugar-beets, 
(b potatoes, (c) gardens, (d) orchards, and (e) corn. 

Wheat, oats, corn, and hay are usually irrigated twice; sugar-beets, 
potatoes, alfalfa, and the other crops three or more times. The depth of 



(i)Gemmell, R. C— U. S. D. A. Bui. No. 104 (1902), pp. 159-163. 



50 



Bulletin No. 177 



irrigation water used varies greatly witli crop and soil. In 189 9 the 
average was about 3.59 feet(i). The total water received by the land 
was 3.59 feet by irrigation and 0.16 feet by rainfall, a total of 3.75 feet. 
The average depth applied at each irrigation in 1899 was 1.2 feet. In 
1899 the greatest demand for water was for wheat and alfalfa an4 
therefore came first in July and second in June. The demand in Au- 
gust and September was due to the late irrigations of alfalfa. At pres- 
ent little wheat is raised at Hyde Park by irrigation. The irrigation of 
alfalfa is about the same now as twenty years ago, but sugar-beets have 
taken the place of wheat as a cash crop on the irrigated land. The heavy 
irrigating seasons are now, as they were in 1899, in July and June. 
Table XXXII shows the crops grown, the period of irrigation, the num- 
ber of irrigations, and the days between irrigations, Hyde Park, Cache 
.County, Utah, 1900. 

Table XXXII.- — Crops Grown, Period of Irrigation, Number of 

Irrigations, Days Between Irrigations, Logan and 

Richmond Canal, 1900 (i) 



Crop Grown 

Wheat- 

Oats. 

Alfalfa. 

Potatoes 

Sugar-beets. 

Gardens 

Orchards 



Period of Irrigation 

June 1 to August 15 

June 15 to August 20.... 
June 6 to September 10.. 

July 10 to August 29 

June 15 to September 20 
June 1 to September 15 
June 1 to September 15 



No. of 


t Days 


Between 


Irrigations 


1 Irr 


gations 


2 




21 


2 




25 


3 to 5 




21 


4 to 6 




20 


5 to 7 




15 


7 to 15 




7 


7 to 15 




7 



The wheat and oats were irrigated twice. Twice as many irrigations 
were necessary for alfalfa as for the small-grains and about twice the 
amount of water was also applied, 2.90 feet as compared to 1.25 feet 
on oats where no waste occurs (i)- 

Quantity of lrrip,ation Water to Use(-). — Wheat requires relatively 
little water. On deep, well-tilled soils 7 % inches of water in two irri- 
gations should be sufficient; on shallow, gravelly soils as high as 18 
inches may be used in 4 or 5 irrigations. An average of one acre-foot 
should' be ample for the production of wheat on fertile, well-tilled soils. 
Oats should not receive less water than wheat; barley about the same 
amount as wheat; but rye may be grown with less water than the other 
small-grains. Corn should seldom receive more than from 12 to 18 
inches of water. 

Alfalfa can make use of more water than the grains and should re- 
ceive from 12 to 24 inches of water according to the age of the crop 
and the depth of the soil. Ordinarily, 18 inches should be enough. The 
other hay-making crops like timothy and orchard grass need even less 
water than a crop of wheat. They are cut only once, while alfalfa is 
cut three times or more. Clover requires probably from 12 to 15 inches 
of water. Pastures and meadows should receive according to location 
from 12 to 24 inches of water. 

Under present practice sugar-beets receive from 15 to 24 inches of 
water, but the tendency is for somewhat less to be used. Carrots and 
other root crops should receive about the same. The more seed is planted 
the more water is required. Potatoes need a good supply of water in 



(i)Swenson, G. L. 
(-')Widtsoe, J. A 
p. 138. Web. Pub. Co., St. Paul 



U. S. D. A. Bui. No. 104 (1902), pp. 179-218. 
Stewart, Geo. — "Western Agriculture" (1918) 
Minn. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 51 

the soil at planting time. The total quantity should be about the same 
as that for sugar-beets. 

As a rule cultivated crops on irrigated land require less water than 
uncultivated crops. Alfalfa requires more than potatoes and oats more 
than corn. It has been aptly said that "the limit of profitable economy 
(in irrigating) is to use the least quantity of water necessary to secure 
the best yield" (i). This is true if by "best yield" we mean the most 
profitable yield. The most profitable yield is not necessarily the highest 
yield. 

It is fairly safe to say that all ordinary crops, including trees and 
shrubs, should receive from 12 to 24 inches of water. This amount is 
considerably less than is now applied to crops. As better cultural meth- 
ods are employed the duty of water becomes higher, that is, less is used 
per acre. 

When to Irrigate. — Investigations at Greenville, the township ad- 
joining Hyde Park on the South, with conditions very similar in most 
respects to the Hyde Park area, show that about 20 inches of water may 
be recommended for use for the growing of corn for grain (2) and about 
30 inches for growing corn stover (s). With sugar-beets, 1 inch of water 
weekly gives higher yields than more than this amount. If only one 
irrigation is given the best time to apply it is when the beets are about 
2 inches in diameter as this results in a higher percentage of sugar in 
the beet than when watered at any other time(*). 

The highest yield of potatoes is produced where small regular irri- 
gations are given. One inch weekly or 12.8 inches during the season 
gives a higher yield than any other treatment (s). This involves a labor 
problem which complicates the irrigation practice. When as much as 
96 inches of water are applied the yield is less than where no water is 
applied. Where but one irrigation is applied, it gives best results if 
applied when the potatoes are in full bloom. The second best stage is 
just as tubers begin to form. Discontinuing irrigation during the rapid 
growing season, after it is once begun, decreases the yield. Excessive 
moisture, or that applied late in the life of the plant, increases the rela- 
tive production of vines. The relative number of tubers per hill is in- 
creased by early irrigation, while the relative size of the tubers is in- 
fluenced more by late water. It is very important to have an even supply 
of moisture during the middle portion of the life of the potato after the 
tubers begin to form, and before they begin to ripen. 

Irrigation experiments with oats show that plats receiving 5 inches 
of water each week for 6 weeks (total 30 inches) gave the highest yield, 
79.9 bushels. The next highest yield was 79 bushels an acre and was 
produced with 15 acre-inches of water (3 five-inch irrigations) («). 

If water was the only limiting factor here, it is evident that it would 
be unwise to apply the additional 15 inches to obtain a yield of only one 
additional bushel, because the same 15 inches if applied to another acre 
of land might produce the same yield as the first 15 inches or 79 bushels. 
Land as land is not a limiting factor here, but land of a particular farm 
so situated as to be readily irrigated and thus to utilize to best advantage 
the 15 inches of water is a limiting factor. Where the location of land 



(i)Meade, Elwood — "Irrigation Institutions" (1910), pp. 116-117. 
Macmillian Co., New York. 

(2) Harris, F. S., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 133, (May, 1914). 

(3) Harris, F. S., and Pittman, D. W., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 
154, (April, 1917), i). 21. 

(4)Harris, F. S., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 156, (June, 1917), p. 22. 

(5)Harris, F. S., Utah Agr. Exp! Sta. Bui. No. 157, (June, 1917), p. 17. 

('^Harris, F. S., and Pittman, D. W., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 
ir.7, (March, 1919), p. 17. 



52 Bulletm No. 177 

limits its use and labor is not a preventing factor, it may be profitable 
to an individual farmer to apply the additional 15 inches of water in 
order to obtain the additional yield of one bushel of oats per acre. 
While this condition may make this practice profitable to an individual 
farmer, it certainly would be uneconomical from the standpoint of 
society as a whole, because some farmer in any irrigated area can use 
15 inches of water more economically than producing just one bushel of 
oats. 

It is apparent then that three five inch irrigations, (1) at the five- 
leaf stage, (2) at the early-boot stage, and (3) in the bloom stage, with 
an average yield per acre of 79 bushels give the most satisfactory re- 
sults generally. Where only one irrigation is given the best time is at 
the five-leaf stage. Where two irrigations are given, (1) the five-leaf, 
and (2) the boot stages are best. 

In the case of alfalfa the first irrigation should occur just before the 
time of bud formation, and another just before or after each cutting. 
Four or five inches of water form a fairly large single application. Us- 
ually a smaller quantity is sufficient to maintain the crop in good con- 
dition (i). 

Farm Credit. — That the farmers' ability to get money may affect the 
type of farming practised in a region has been well demonstrated in the 
tenant system of single-crop cotton-farming in the Southern States. 

Table XXXIII. — Farm Mortgages, Hyde Park, Cache County, 
Utah, 1914 



Number of farms reporting 52 

Number of farms mortgaged 18 

Amount of mortgaged debt (average)....- ,....$1,151 

Value of land and buildings per farm mortgage 

(average) 9,559 

Ratio of mortgage debt to value of land and buildings 12 per cent 
Number of farms on which rate of interest paid 

was 6 per cent 1 

Number of farms on which rate of interest paid 

was 8 per cent 14 

Number of farms on which rate of interest paid 

was 8% per cent. 1 

Number of farms on which rate of interest paid 

was 9 per cent 2 

Average rate of interest paid by 18 farmers 8.03 per cent 

Again many farmers of the Intermountain States claim that they would 
like to go into livestock farming but that they lack the money necessary 
to get into the business in good shape. The funds a farmer operates 
with are in tne form of capital goods, cash, or credit. Credit is obtained 
from banks or other institutions or persons loaning money to farmers, 
on the basis of the applicants character, capacity, and collateral. The 
mortgage debt of farmers may therefore be important in determining 
type of farming. Farmers often obtain funds for construction, develop- 
ment, and operation by mortgaging the farm. 

At Hyde Park in 1914, 18 farms out of 52 were mortgaged. The 
average value of land and buildings per farm mortgaged was $9,559 and 
the average mortgage debt $1,151, or 12 per cent of the value of the 
land and buildings. The rate of interest most common was 8 per cent. 
Fourteen farmers paid 8 per cent, 1 paid 8 Vz per cent, 2 paid 9 per cent, 

(i)Widtsoe, J. A., and Stewart, George, "Western Agriculture", 
(1918), p. 142. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



53 



Table XXXIV.— Mortgage 


Debt of Farms by Counties, Utah, 1910 (i) 




I For 


all Farms Op- 


For Martgaged Farms Consisting of 




erated by Owners 




Owned Land Only 


















Q -a -^ 




















a 

9 




n 


s 


IS 


^ 


C.% 


Area 






5S 


u 

u o 
CD a 


D3 S 


S 0) ^ 


c3 C 

1^^ 




o 

is 


fc S 
S 


ll 


art 


CD O 


a ^'^ 






cS 
fc 




Ss 


^ 


> cd 


-S 


O > rz 

111 


State 


15.131 


4,492 


139 


3,526 


21,319,580 


4,564,175 


21.4 


Counties 

Beaver 

Boxelder .... 

Cache 

Carbon 

Davis 

Emery 

Garfield 


263 


.x' 


1 


17 


117,150 


18,980 


16.2 


869 


502 


11 


369 


2,767,325 


601,590 


21.7 


1,126 


621 


9 


449 

19^ 


3,606,494 


672,922 


18.7 


132 


21 


2 


97,700 


14,520 


14.9 


937 


261 


7 


225 


1,702,213 


363,731 


21.4 


447 


177 


1 


166 


957,867 


206,575 


21.6 


318 


31 


4 


30 


101,885 


30,065 


29.5 


Grand 

Iron 


129 


26 


1 


21 


154,295 


15,198 


9.9 


303 

408 


23 

68 


7 
19 


14 
64 


85,600 
327,315 


18,280 
93,992 


21.4 




28.7 


Kane 


152 

585 


12 
75 


10 


10 
56 


37,980 
220.330 


9,180 
46.560 


24.2 


Millard 


21.1 


Morgan 

Piute 


167 


46 




31 


189,040 


24.495 


13.0 


132 


41 


1 


33 


109,250 


28.667 


26.2 


Rich 


142 


56 




46 


382,455 


122.426 


32.0 


Salt Lake— . 


1,418 


454 


4 


366 


1,911,295 


396,625 


20.8 


San Juan 


142 


9 




7 


26,018 


8,300 


31.9 


Sanpete 


1.307 


319 


2 


256 


1,177.698 


237,972 


20.2 


Sevier 


633 


315 


3 


274 


1,312.515 


266,324 


20.3 


Summit 


355 


51 


1 


42 


305.313 


64,585 


21.2 


Tooele 


245 


44 




31 


372.065 


55,250 


14.8 


Uinta 


457 


115 


29 


105 


463.975 


99,819 


21.5 


Utah 


1.971 


648 


22 


489 


2,675.370 


650,040 


24.3 


Wasatch ...... 


790 


98 


2 


81 


491,062 


118.745 


24.2 


Washington 


553 


30 




21 


46,558 


7,125 


15.3 


Wayne 


208 


23 


2 


18 


58,200 


11,195 


19.2 


Weber 


942 


369 


1 


286 


1,622,612 


381,014 


23.5 



and 1 paid only 6 per cent interest on the farm mortgage. The average 
rate therefore, was 8.03 per cent including commissions, when paid, 
(See Table XXXIII.) 

From investigations that have been made here and elsewhere in the 
State It seems that these farmers might make more money by extend- 
ing their operations by increasing the number of acres cropped and the 
number of productive livestock units handled!-'). With the operation of 
the Federal Land Bank at San Francisco and a Local Farm Loan Asso- 
ciation in Cache County these farmers should be able to extend their 



(1)1910 U. S. Census. 

(-■)Brossard, E. B.. Utah Agr. College Cir. No. 23, and also Utah Agr. 
Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 160. 



64 Bulletin No. 177 

operations considerably by using funds obtained by credit based on the 
farm mortgage. 

Under tlie Federal Farm Loan Act farmers are able to borrow as 
much as 50 per cent of the value of the land for agricultural purposes 
and 20 per cent of the value of the permanent insured improvements."" 
At present the interest rate is 5 ^2 per cent. The loan may be obtained 
for a period of 4 years if desired with the privilege of paying it or any 
part of it any time after 5 years. Regular payments on the amortization 
plan are required each year. 

In Cache County in 1910,(i), 621 farms were mortgaged, 449 of 
which consisted of owned land only. The total value of the land and 
buildings mortgaged was $3,606,494, and the mortgage debt $672,922, 
or 18.7 per cent of the value of land and buildings. (See Table XXXIV). 

Table XXXV. — Farm Mortgages, Utah and the United States, 1910 (i) 

Utah U. S. 

Total Farms Reporting 19,762 3,948,722 

Farms Free from Mortgage 15,131 2,588,596 

Farms Mortgaged 4,492 1,312,034 

Farms not Specified 139 48,092 

Morgtaged Farms owned wholly by the 

Operator 3,526 1,006,511 

Value of Land and Buildings on Mort- 
gaged Farms $21,319,580 $6,330,236,951 

Amount of Mortgaged Debt 4,564,175 1,726,172,851 

Mortgaged Farms owned wholly by the 

Land and Buildings (per cent) 21.4 27.3 

Average Value of Land and Buildings 

per Farm 6,046 6,289 

Average Mortgage Debt per Farm 1,294 1,715 

Average Equity per Farm 4,752 4,574 



In Utah in 1910 (i), of 19,762 farms reporting, 15,131 were free 
from mortgage, 4,492 were mortgaged, and 139 did not specify. There 
were 3,52 6 mortgaged farms wholly owned by the operators. The value 
of land and buildings on these farms was $21,319,580 and the mortgage 
debt was $4,564,175, or 21.4 per cent of the value of land and build- 
ings. This ratio for the United States as a whole was 27.3 per cent. 

The average value of land and buildings per farm in Utah, 1910, 
was $6,046 and the average mortgage debt per farm was $1,294 thus 
leaving an average equity of $4,752 per farm. For the United States as 
a whole the average value of land and buildings per farm was $6,289, 
the average mortgage debt $1,715, and the average equity $4,574 per 
farm. (See Table XXXV). 

A fairly accurate estimate (->) of the farm mortgage debt of all Utah 
farmers in 1914 places it at $6,818,000, of which $6,000,000 or 88 per 
cent was held by banks, $862,000, or 12.6 per cent, held by life insur- 
ance companies, and $340,000 negotiated by banks and bank officials as 
agents or correspondents for other investors. These figures do not check 
exactly because they have been arrived at separately and no attempt 
has been made to force them. It is also estimated that 67 per cent of 
the farm mortgage business of Utah, pays no commission and 33 per 
cent of the business pays an average commission of .4 per cent. Of the 



(1)1910 U. S. Census, Vol. 5, Tables 9, 11, and 12. 

(2)Thompson, C. W., U. S. D. A., Office of Markets and Rural Organ- 
ization, Bui. No. 384, (July, 1916), pp. 2, 8, and 10 respectively. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 55 

total mortgage business 18.3 per cent pays a commission in advance and 
14.7 per cent pays it on the installment plan. The average mortgage 
rate of interest paid was S.6 per cent, which makes 9 per cent with the 
commission. The estimated average interest rate for farm loans on 
I)ersonal security in Utah, 1914 (i). was 8.8 per cent and the estimated 
average other costs of the loans, 1.6 per cent, making the average esti- 
mated total cost, including discounts, bonuses, commissions and any 
other extra charges, 10.4 per cent. -Only in unusual cases can farmers 
pay this high rate and make a profit in farming. 

Farm Profits. — Farm profits are largely determined by the type of 
rarming practised. The type of farming most profitable depends upon 
the circumstances of the individual farmer and farm. Two of the first 
questions that arise in one's mind are: (1) Is farming profitable? and 
(2) How profitable is it? 

Table XXXVI shows the average labor income of 52 Hyde Park farm- 
ers in 1914. The value of the farm house is included as a part of the 
capital investment, the increase in the value of land is omitted, and the 
interest rate used is 8 per. cent. 

Table XXXVI. — Average Labor Income, 52 Farms, Hyde Park, 1914 

Capital Investment $13,642 

Receipts $ 2,510 

iilxpenses 1,882 

Farm Income (Receipts less expenses).... $1,628 

Interest on Capital Investment (at 8 per cent).... 1,091 

Labor Income $537 

At 5 per cent(-'), interest is $682 and labor income, $946; at 5 1/^ 
)jer cent (3), interest is $750 and labor income $878; at 8 per cent(^), 
interest is $1,091 and labor income $537; at 8.6 per cent(5), interest is 
$1,173 and labor income $455; and at 9 per cent ('-), interest is $1,228 
and labor income C^4 00. 

Table XXXVII shows the farmer's pay for management and risk or 
responsibility taken, 52 farms, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914. 

Table XXXVIII shows the labor income of the 10 better-paying farms 
of Hyde Park in 1914. At 5 per cent, interest is $991 and labor income, 
$1,997; at 5 1^ per cent, interest is $1,090 and labor income, $1,899; 
at 8 per cent, interest is $1,585 and labor income, $1,403; at 8.6 per 
cent, interest is $1,704 and labor income, $1,2 85; and at 9 per cent, in- 
terest is $1,783 and labor income, $1,206. 

(i)Thompson, C. W.. U. S. D. A., Office of Markets and Rural Or- 
ganization, Bui. No. 409, (August, 1916), p. 6. 

(-)The investigators of the Office of Farm Management, U. S. D. A. 
use 5 per cent interest for all districts in the United States in calculating 
labor income. (a) Thompson, E. H.. and others, U. S. D. A., B. P. I., 
Bui. No. 41, (Jan., 1914); (b) Thompson, E. H., and others, U. S. D. A.. 
B. P. I., Bui. No. 117, (July, 1914); (c) Spillman, W. J., and others, 
U. S. D. A., Farm Mgt. Bui. No. 341, (Jan., 1916); and (d) Connor, L. 
G., U. S. D. A., Farm Mgt. Bui. No. 582, (Jan., 1918), Note, p. 2. 

(3)The Federal Farm Loan Act of July 17, 1916, provides that in- 
teresc rate on farm n.ortpage lo.-ms shall not exceed 6 per cent, nor be 
more than 1 per c?n: grt^ater than the rate on the last issue of farm loan 
bonds The present rate on farm mortgages under this act is 5 i/^ per cent. 

(4)The most common rate of interest at Hyde Park and in the State. 

(5)The estimated average mortgage rate without commission for Utah. 

(c)The estimated average mortgage rate including commissions, Utah. 



56 Bulletin No. 177 



Table XXXVII. — The Farmer's Pay for Management and Risk or 
Responsibility Taken, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 



Number of Farms 52 

Capital Investment (1) $12,307 

Total Income $3,183 

Farm sales and increase in inventory other than land.. 2,510 

Value of farm products, food and fuel, used in home (2) 411 

Increase in value of land (105 A. at $2.50 per A.) (3) 262 

Total Subtractions ..'. 2,467 

Unpaid family labor 204 

Help hired by month or year 56 

Help hired by day or piece 116 

Cash expense for board of hired help 11 

Other cash farm expenses . 495 

Opportunity value of farmer's labor (^) 600 

Interest on capital at 8 per cent(')- .• 985 

Farmer's Pay for Management and Risk or Responsibility 

taken (Total income minus total subtractions) 716 

Table XXXIX shows the farm capital, receipts, expenses, farm in- 
come, interest on investment, and labor income of farms of the Hyde 
Park area. Cache County, Utah, 1915. At 5 per cent, interest on the 
average capital invested in the 4 8 farms is $599 and labor income $589; 
at 5% per cent, interest is $569 and labor income $529; at 8 per cent, 
interest is $95 9 and labor income $229; at 8.6 per cent, interest is 
.>i,031 and labor income $157; and at 9 per cent, interest is $1,076 and 
labor income $112. The average of the 10 better-paying farms has a 
labor income of $1,446 with interest at 5 per cent, $1,374 with interest 
at 5% per cent, $1,015 with interest at 8 per cent, $920 when interest 
is 8.6 per cent, and $872 with interest at 9 per cent. The average of 
the 10 poorer-paying farms had a labor income of minus $93 with in- 
terest figured at 5 per cent. 

Table XL shows the labor income of farmers of the Hyde Park area. 
Cache County, Utah, 1916. The labor incomes of the farmers of this 

(1) Average capital investment, 5 2 farms, $13,642; minus $1,335, 
average value of dwelling, 50 farms. 

(2)Funk, W. C, U. S. D. A., Farmers' Bui. No. 635, (Dec, 1914), 
p. .5, gives $64.19 as the average value per person of food and fuel pro- 
duced on the farm and consumed in the farm home on 48 3 farms in 10 
representative districts of the United States. At Hyde Park the farmers 
use about the average amount of fuel and food items mentioned in this 
bulletin and in addition get their year's supply of wheat for flour which 
is taken as grist to the mills. The average consumption per person of 
wheat for flour in the United States in 1914 was about 5 bushels. The 
average price of wheat in Utah Dec. 1, 1914, was $0.86. The value of 
wheat used for flour per person was, therefore, 5x$0.86, or $4.30. $4.30 
plus $64.19 equals $68.49 per person in the farm family. There were, 
on the average, 6 persons per family on the farms at Hyde Park, 1914, 
and 6x$68.49 equals $410.84 per family, or in whole numbers, $411. 

(3)1910 U. S. Census shows that in the ten years ending April 15, 
1910, land in Cache County, increased in value $24.93 per acre, from 
$12.92 in 1900 t-o $37.85 in 1910. This amounts to $2.50 an acre each 
year. It is assumed that land at Hyde Park increased at this same rate. 

(-') Estimated by the farmers. The estimates varied from $200 to 
SI, 000. 

(■■■■)The most common rate of interest paid at Hyde Park and else- 
where in Utah. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



57 



Table XXXVIII. — Business Statement of the Average of 10 Better- 
Paying Farms of the Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 
1914, Showing Type of Farming and Labor Income 



Farm Capital No. Value 

Total acres in farm 226 $16,152 

Cattle (including milk cows) 27 1,225 

Horses and colts 10 1,204 

f aeep 1 4 

Hogs 6 72 

Poultry 77 35 

Machinery 542 

Feed and supplies 542 

Cash 51 

Total Farm Capital $19,816 

Farm Receipts 

Crops 

Sugar-beets $ 1,070 

Grain 908 

Potatoes 190 

Hay 59 

Fruits and Vegetables 16 

Livestock 

Dairy products • 623 

Cattle(i) : 399 

Horses(i) 194 

Hogs(i) 116 

Poultry(i) and eggs 64 

Miscellaneous receipts 348 

increase in feed and supplies 146 

Total Farm Receipts $ 4,133 

Farm Expenses 

Hired labor(^) $ 288 

Value of family labor(3) 272 

Cash rent and forest reserve fees 127 

Taxes 117 

Machinery repairs and depreciation 33 

TUiilding and fence repairs and depreciation.. 12 

I'ced : 50 

Horseshoeing and veterinary fees 30 

Breeding fees and seeds... 5g 

Threshing and twine (excludes toll) 72 

Machine work hired 6 

Water tax 24 

Miscellaneous, expenses 5 6 

Total Farm Expenses $ 1.145 

Farm Income (receipts minus expenses) 2.988 

Interest on total farm capital (at 8 per cent) L585 

Labor Income 1^403 

(i)The receipts from stock are found by subtracting the sum of the 
purchases and what is on hand at the beginning of the year from the 
sum of the sales and that on hand at the close of the yefir. 

(-)Includes cash expense of boarding hired labor. 

I (Except that of the operator of the farm. 



58 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XXXIX. — Business Statement of Farms of Hyde Park Area, 
Cache County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of Average of Average 

10 better- 10 least- of all 

paying profitable 48 

farms farms farms 

Farm ("apital 

Real estate(i) $11,396 $10,438 $ 9,471 

Livestock 2,062 1,410 1,629 

Machinery and tools 489 405 469 

Feed and seeds..... 376 422 . 344 

Cash - 35 13 74 

Total Farm Capital... $14,358 $12,688 $11,987 

Farm Receipts 

Crops $ 1,569 $ 958 $ 1,049 

Livestock 1,074 336 692 

Miscellaneous receipts 413 92 233 

Increase in feed and seeds inventory 84 13 

Total Farm Receipts.... $ 3,041 $ 1,386 $ 1,987 

Farm Expenses 

Current farm expenses.. $ 789 $ 604 $ 693 

Depreciation in mach., bldgs., fences 88 121 106 

Decrease in inventory of feed and seeds.. 120 

Total Farm Expenses..... $ 877 $ 845 $ 799 

Farm income (receipts-expenses) $ 2,164 $ 541 $ 1,188 

Interest on total farm capital 

(at 8 per cent) $ 1.149 $ 1,015 $ 95'9 

Labor income $ 1,015 $ -474 $ 229 

area are better than the average of the State and perhaps some better 
than the average of the country as a whole. The business is about the 
same each year and tho there are always a few who make very little 
if anything, the profits of the majority are normal. 

Table XL! shows the average, total, and yearly labor income of each of 
32 Hyde Park farmers who cooperated for each of the three years, 1914, 
1915, and 1916. They are separated into three groups, the 10 better- 
paying farms, the 12 medium-profitable farms, and the 10 least-profitable 
farms. It should be noted that in general the farms which have a high- 
average labor income have also a large one for each of the three years 
and those having a low-average have also a small labor income each year. 
There are, however, some farmers whose labor income has varied 
greatly. In these cases special conditions and circumstances have been 
the cause. The following facts from two farm statements illustrate 
this point. 

Farm 2, L-6, was less successful in 1915 because of failure of dry- 
farm wheat. Farm 4, L-2, was not so successful in 1915 on account of 
having only $42 worth of potatoes to sell instead of the $250 worth as 
in 1914, as but one instead of two and a half acres was planted. His 
livestock was not nearly so profitable in 1915 because of misfortune 
with calves, colts, and pigs. And his expenses were $500 greater. The 
increase in expenses was due to a grown son's help on the farm for a 
longer period, thus lightening the labor of the operator, but increasing 

(i)Real estate includes all land, buildings, fences, drains, etc., at 
their market value at the beginning of the farm year, or January 1, 1915. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



59 



Table XL. — Business Statement of Farms of Hyde Park Area, 
Cache County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of Average of Average 

10 better- 10 least- of all 

paying profitable 32 

farms farms farms 



Farm Capital 
Real estate 

Land ? 9.362 

Buildings - -• 1.148 

Livestock 2,324 

Machinery 416 

reed and supplies 509 

Total Farm Capital $14,059 

Farm Receipts 
Crops 

Potatoes $ 3 

Grain 761 

Sugar-beets 1,013 

Hay -.... 12 

Other Crops — 

Livestock 

Dairy products 642 

Poultry and egg sales 33 

Cattle sales 299 

Horse sales 121 

Sheep sales - — 

Svi^ine sales 49 

Other receipts 331 

Increase in livestock inventory 287 

Increase in feed and supplies 224 

Total Farm Receipts $ 3,775 

Farm Expenses 

Blacksmith and machine work $ 57 

Hired labor 118 

Mach., bldg., and fence material 31 

Feed and seeds 132 

Fees, rents, and taxes 181 

Other expenses 128 

Livestock purchased 68 

Decrease in livestock inventory — 

Decrease in machinery inventory 46 

Decrease in feed and supplies — 

Decrease in land and buildings 44 

Value of family labor 115 

Total Farm Expenses f 920 

Farm income (Receipts-Expenses) 2,885 

Interest on Total Farm Capital 

(at 8 per cent) 1,125 

Labor Income 1,760 



$ 7,114 

1,433 

1,149 

374 

338 

$10,408 



4 
197 
557 

1 



294 
34 

137 

60 

3 

20 

104 



880 
531 



833 
-302 



8,185 

1,516 

1,534 

395 

377 



$12,056 



23 
368 
793 



453 
35 

204 

129 

1 

24 

214 

38 



$ 1,411 


$ 2,291 


$ 55 


$ 51 


110 


127 


46 


43 


31 


85 


151 


153 


55 


72 


46 


55 


187 


46 


1 


11 


42 


— 


26 


35 


130 


87 



$ 765 
1,526 

964 
562 



the expense for unpaid family labor, and to the fact that $272 worth of 
hay was purchased because of the unusually cold winter making more 
feed necessary, the drought in July and August "burning up" the ranges, 



60 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XLI. — Labor Incomes(i) of 32 Farmers, Hyde Park, 
Cache County, Utah, 1914, 1915, and 1916 





Farm 




Labor Income 






Order 


Number 
B-3 


Average 


Total 


1914 


1915 


1916 


1. 


$3,419 


$10,257 


$1,949 


$2,435 


$5,873 


2. 


L-6 


2,831 


8,494 


4,277 


345 


3,872 


3 


P-2 


1,857 


5,570 


1,301 


1,629 


2,640 


4. 


L-2 


1,559 


4,678 


2,226 


950 


1,502 


5. 


W-2 


1,487 


4,462 


1,306 


1,703 


1,453 


6. 


H-2 


1,276' 


3,827 


1,840 


1,172 


815 


7. 


L-1 


1,267 


3,801 


1,395 


1,185 


1,221 


8. 


C-1 


1,169 


. 3,506 


1,004 


1,123 


1,379 


9. 


L-3 


1,084 


3,251 


1,644 


1,043 


564 


10. 


S-3 


1,083 


3,248 


1,287 


1,167 


794 


Total 


A-1 


17,032 
1,703 


51,094 


18,229 


12,752 


20,113 


.Vverage 


5,109 


1,823 


1,275 


2,011 


11. 


1,027 


3,080 


1,772 


154 


1,154 


12. 


W-1 


988 


2,963 


1,537 


1,126 


301 


13. 


N-1 


942 


2,826 


947 


1,022 


857 


14. 


J-1 


928 


2,783 


928 


251 


1,504 


15. 


S-4 


841 


2,524 


850 


659 


1,015 


16. 


R-1 


787 


2,360 


1,425 


643 


292 


17. 


S-5 


773 


2,319 


889 


468 


962 


18. 


K-2 


732 


2,196 


1,065 


399 


732 


19. 


K-1 


681 


2,043 


1,166 


883 


-6 


20. 


D-1 


622 


1,865 


768 


698 


399 


21. 


G-1 


613 


1,839 


654 


437 


748 


22 


B-2 


557 


1,672 


1,039 


296 


337 


Total 


W-5 


9,491 


28,470 


13,040 


7,036 


8,395 


Average 


791 


2,372 


1,087 


586 


700 


23. 


514 


1,543 


775 


738 


30 


24 


R-2 


492 


1,476 


708 


299 


469 


25. 


H-3 


419 


1.257 


843 


210 


204 


26. 


H-1 


418 


1,253 


484 


57 


712 


27. 


C-3 


207 


620 


483 


104 


33 


28. 


L-4 


153 


459 


- 58 


327 


190 


29. 


P-1 


67 


202 


63 


- 50 


189 


30. 


C-4 


- 40 


- 121 


86 


-153 


- 54 


31. 


S-2 


- 105 


- 315 


156 


-130 


-341 


32. 


F-1 


- 222 


- 666 


2 


-237 


-431 


Total 


tal 
'erage 


1.903 


5,708 


3,542 


1,165 


1,001 


Average 


190 


571 


354 


116 


100 


Grand Toi 


28,426 


85,272 


34,811 


20,953 


29,509 


Grand A\ 


888 


2,665 


1,088 


655 


922 



and to the fact that he raised but 4 6 tons of hay instead of 54 as in 
1914. due to fewer acres planted. 

The variations in labor income from year to year on an individual 

(1)5 per cent interest on investment vsras subtracted in calculating 
labor income. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 61 

farm result from the various causes which affect farm profits on differ- 
ent farms, because each year, in a measure, presents an entirely new set 
or combination of conditions which the farmer has to meet and over a 
great many of these factors he has no control whatever. 

The landlords, who rented out their land to farmers that wanted it 
to work with their own farms, received on the average between 6 and 7 
per cent net return on the investment. The owner usually pays the 
taxes on rented land, which average about 0.8 per cent at Hyde Park 
for both land and water, and these with all other expenses have been 
deducted. The percentage which the net rent forms of the total invest- 
ment varied from 3 to 18. 

With land values increasing as they have in the past, at the rate of 
£>bout $2.50 per acre annually, and an annual income of 6 to 7 per cent 
on the investment, owning Hyde Park farm land has been profitable. 
Men would buy farm land in preference to loaning their money on farm 
mortgages if interest rates were considerably higher than 8 per cent 
because of the rise in land value and the rent they are able to get from 
its use in farming. 

Table XLII shows the labor income(i) of Utah farmers for the year 
1909 as calculated from the 1910 U. S. Census. Using 0.5 per cent as 
the tax rate and 5 per cent interest the labor income was $322. Using 
0.6 per cent as the tax rate and 5 per cent interest the labor income was 
$313. Using 0.8 (-) per cent tax rate and 8 per cent interest labor income 
was $8 8. With interest at 8.6 per cent, labor income was $47, and with 
interest at 9 per cent, labor income was $19. 

In calculating this labor income no credit or debit was made for in- 
crease or decrease in the value of farm land. This increase or decrease 
is an important factor in the farmer's income. The 1910 U. S. Census 
shows that in the decade 1900 to 1910 farm land in Utah increased in 
value at the rate of 11.625 per cent compounded annually on the 1900 
value ("). In Minnesota farm land increased at the rate of 5.6 per cent 
compounded annually on the 1900 value (*). In the United States as a 
whole, it increased at the rate of 5.621 per cent compounded annually. 
The average increase in the value of an acre of land each year for the 
'lecade 1900 to 1910 was in Utah, $1.95; in Minnesota, $1.55; and in 
the United States as a whole, $1.68. The average labor income of farm- 
ers of the United States as a whole for the year 1909 was $318(5). 
Taxes were figured at 0.6 per cent and interest at 5 per cent. Using 
0.5 per cent as tax rate and 5 per cent interest the average labor income 
of Minnesota farmers for the same year was $330('*). 

(i)Method of calculation is that used by W. J. Spillman in U. S. D. A. 
B. P. I., Cir. No. 132, (July, 1913); and by F. W. Peck in Minn. Farm 
?*Ianagement Service Notes, Cir. No. 2, (March, 1914). Includes unpaid 
family labor and all the farm furnishes towards the family living except 
milk. Does not include income from outside sources; and the amount 
paid for livestock bought must be deducted. 

(^)Third An. Rpt.. Utah Bur. Immig. Lab. and Stat., (1917). p. 350. 
shows that the State and State School tax levy was 8 mills in 1909. The 
average taxes paid by the 10 better-paying farms in each of 6 areas in 
1914 was 8.2 mills on each dollar invested in the farm business. 

(:=)Brossard, E. B., Utah Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 160, (Sept., 1917). 

(J)Boss, A., and Benton. A. H., and Cavert, W. M., Minn. Exp. Sta. 
Bui. No. 170, (Oct., 1917). 

(••) Spillman, W. J., U. S. D. A., B. P. I., Cir. No. 132, (July, 1913-). 

('•■)Peck, F. W.. Minn. Farm Mgt. Service Notes, Cir. No. 2, (March. 
■914). 



62 Bulletin No. 17? 

Table XLII. — Labor Income of Utah Farmers, 1909 
(1910 Census Report) 

Item Total Per farm 

Number of farms 21,676 156. 7(\) 

Improved land (acres) 1,368,211 63.1 

Total Farm investment $150,795,201 $6,957 

Land 99,482,164 4,590 

Buildings 18,063,168 833 

Machinery 4,468,178 206 

Livestock 28,781,691 1,328 

Receipts 
Dairy products (excluding milk and 

cream used at home on the farm) $ 2,067,534 $ 95 

Poultry and eggs produced... - 1,259,267 58 

Honey and wax produced 79,763 4 

Wool and mohair produced 1,891,221 87 

Animals sold 5,899,382 272 

Animals slaughtered 756,854 35 

Total value of all crops .$18,484,615 $853 

Corn $ 134,396 $ 6 

Oats 1,671,065 77 

Barley 472,816 22 

Hay 7,429,901 343 



Total value of feed crops $ 9,708,178 $448 

Receipts from sale of feed 

crops 1,336,199 62 



Net value of crops fed $ 8,371,979 $386 

Net value of crops 10,112,636 467 



Total gross farm income $22,066,658 $1,018 

Expenses 

Labor $ 2,863,709 $ 132 

Rent and board furnished 306,208 14 

Fertilizer 20,037 1 

Feed 727,409 34 

Maintenance of buildings (at 5 ^/^ per cent 

of value) 993,474 46 

Maintenance of machinery and imple- 
ments (20 per cent of value) 893,636 

Taxes (0.8 per cent). 1,206,362 



Total... $ 7,040,805 

Miscellaneous expenses (15 per cent 

of other expenses) 1,056,121 



Total Farm Expenses $ 8,096,926 

Summary 

Total gross farm income $22,066,658 

Total farm expenses 8,096,926 



Net farm income $13,969,732 

Interest on investment (at 8 per cent) 12,063,616 





41 

56 


$ 


324 




49 


$ 


373 


$1,018 
373 


$ 


645 

557 



Labor income $ 1,906,116 $ 88 

(1) Average Total acres per farm. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 63 

Suiiiinary. — Special mention should be made of some of the princi- 
pal points concerning the type of farming at Hyde Park. The combina- 
tions of enterprises are the result of the "survival of the fittest" in the 
competition of enterprises for a place in the farm business. The number 
of livestock in the area is increasing but its increase depends largely 
upon the development of the farm pastures and the improvement of the 
ranges and of necessity is gradual. The climate, soil, and topography 
limit the use of much land in this area to the grazing of livestock. The 
farm business of the area is diversified and fairly well balanced when 
all of the farm, family, and labor conditions are taken into considera- 
tion. The size of farm business is not great, but it is based upon the 
farm family as the unit of organization, and seems in most cases to be 
fairly well adapted to the conditions. The farm machinery and build- 
ings are similar to those found on farms elsewhere in the country. One 
distinctive feature, which has a decided effect upon the type of farming, 
is the location of the farm buildings and the farm family in town in- 
stead of on the farms. 

The administration of the National Forests by the Federal Govern- 
ment limits the use of the range to land-owning farmers and establishes 
priority of rights on the ranges and protection for these rights and thus 
influences the type of farming practised on some farms. The National 
Forests and range-stock farming are closely correlated. 

The population and the character of the individual persons have 
affected the type of farming at Hyde Park by limiting markets for some 
farm products, establishing markets for others, and by determining the 
abilities and training of farmers to produce successfully the crops and 
livestock wanted. The farmer and his family do most of the farm work. 
The families are large and the children contribute considerably to the 
family income by milking cows and working in the sugar-beets. The 
sugar-beet enterprise was made possible by the establishment of Sugar 
Factories. 

No tenant farms are included in this investigation. Some owners 
rent additional land. The percentage of tenancy is low in Cache County 
and Utah because (1) it is a relatively new country and until recently 
it was easy for one to become an owner and thus take advantage of the 
rise in the value of land; (2) the natural sentiment of the people is 
against tenancy and in favor of owning their own homes and businesses, 
for religious and social as well as economic reasons; and (3) the type 
of farming practised and range and water conditions all tend to make it 
desirable to own all or a large part of the farm land one operates. Even 
tho land values are based upon the productivity of the land, the farmer 
on a given farm must select such farm enterprises as will be profitable 
on his land, and thus on the individual farm, land values determine to 
some extent the type of farming. 

The irrigation water available, the ownership and operation of irri- 
gation canals, the duty of water, the amount of water required by crops, 
and the proper times of applications on the various crops are all factors 
influencing the type of farming at Hyde Park. 

The farm credit institutions and the available money for farm opera- 
tions undoubtedly are important factors influencing type of farming in 
individual cases, but with the operation of the Federal Land Bank some 
of the credit needs of these farmers may be met. 

All the foregoing factors and many others influence the tvpe of farm- 
ing and thus farm profits. At Hyde Park, profits are not phenominally 
high nor discouragingly low. On the average they allow a good living 
for the farm family and in addition farmers are "getting ahead." 



64 



Bulletin No. 177 



BEAVER, BEAVER COUNTY, UTAH 

The seven remaining areas are treated briefly, and each compared 
with Hyde Park. Some outstanding points of difference and similarity 
are noted. 

The city of Beaver is situated about 300 miles west of south of 
Hyde Park. It is in the eastern part of the southeast quarter of Beaver 
County, in township 29 south, and range 7 west of Salt Lake Meridian. 

The elevation at Beaver is 6000 feet or about 1500 feet higher than 
Hyde Park. 



Table XLIII. 



-Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 50 Farms, 
Beaver, Beaver County, Utah, 1914 



Item 


Farms 
Reporting 


Average Acres ( i ) Average Acres ( i ) 
50 l-arms 
Farms | Reporting 


Farm Area 


50 

48 

4 

5 


179 1 185 


Owned by Operator 
Cash-rented Land.. 
Share-rented Land.. 


174 1 123 
3 1 34 
3 1 25 


Crops 


50 
44 

2 
48 
16 


67 1 67 
27 1 31 


Summer Fallow 

Farmstead and Waste 
Uncultivated 


1 5 
12 1 12 . 
71 1 222 


Irrigated Land 
Garden 


12 
2 

11 
2 

38 


1 1 


Carrots ... -- 


1 


Corn for Grain 

Corn for Silage 


1 2 

1 2 

1 1 1 




36 i 5 7 


Winter Wheat 

Rye 

Oats 

Barley 

Oat Hay 

Hay 

Wild Hay 

Alfalfa 

Oats and Peas 

Peas 

Cabbage 

Beets - 

Apples, not Bearing 

Apples, Bearing 

Beans and Alfalfa.. 
Plums 


2 1 7 

2 1 7 

33 1 7 10 

20 1 2 4 

9 1 2 10 

18 1 5 14 

18 1 11 30 

49 1 33 1 33 

4 1 1 8 

2 1 

2 1 14 

2 1 1 1 

2 1 1 1 

■ 1 1 j 

11 1 1 29 

1 ' 1 n 


Berries 


1 


1 



Table XLIII shows the tenure and use of farm land at Beaver in 
1914. On the average there were 179 acres to the farm, of which about 
.i74 acres were operated by the owners, 3 acres cash rented, and 3 acres 
share rented by the operator. About 69 acres were in crops, 27 acres 
were in pasture, 71 acres were uncultivated, and 12 acres were in the 
farmstead, roads, lanes, ditches, and other waste land. There was no 
land dry-farmed in this area in 1914. 



(1) Areas are given to the nearest acre. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 65 

Based on acreage, alfalfa was the main crop occupying 33 acres. 
Wild hay occupied 11 acres and other hay 5 acres, and oat hay 2 acres, 
or a total including alfalfa of 51 acres in hay, or 75 per cent of the 
total area in crops. Other crops and acreages grown are: oats, 7; spring 
wheat, 5; barley, 2; potatoes, 1; oats and peas, 1; cabbage, 1; and fruii 
and other vegetables, 1. The significant fact about the crops grown is 
the large acreage in hay. This hay is grown largely for feed for livestock. 
Dates of farm crop operations are shown in Table XXXVII in Appendix. 

Table III in Appendix shows the capital, receipts, expenses, and labor 
income of the average of 10 better-paying farms. It shows livestock and 
stock products to be the main sources of income. 

However, some hay, grain, a few potatoes, and a little fruit are sold. 
The crops sold are consumed locally. Some feed, 347 worth, was bought 
locally, and cash rent and Forest Reserve fees amounted to $18. Ex- 
penses for hired labor were $600, and for unpaid family labor $96, or a 
total labor expense oi" about $696 besides that of the operator of the 
farm. 

The two main sources of income on the average farm as well as on 
Ihe average of the ten better-paying farms were cattle and sheep as 
sho^n in Table iV in Appendix. The better-paying farms had a larger 
business and their livestock was more productive in proportion to feed 
fed. Man and horse labor were both more efficient on the better-paying 
farms than on the average farm. 

Tables V, VI, and VII in Appendix show the same facts about the 
type of farming in this area for the years 1915 and 1916 as was shown 
extant in 1914. However, the labor income of the farmers was greater, 
on the average, in 1915 than 1914 and greater in 1916 than 1915. The 
average labor income on all 44 farms in 1916 was $711. The average of 
the ten least-profitable farms was minus $613, and of the ten most- 
profitable farms it was $2537. 

The farm business at Beaver is well diversified. Cattle, sheep, dairy- 
ing, and feed and a surplus of hay, grain, and potatoes as cash crops 
make a fairly well balanced business. During the winter months, how- 
ever, many farmers' sons spend too much of their time in town playing 
pool, etc., instead of at productive farm labor. 

The Beaver farms are larger than the Hyde Park farms' but the type 
of farming is more extensive at Beaver. At Hyde Park there are more 
acres of intensive crops and more dairy cows and fewer acres of hay and 
fewer range cattle and sheep. 

The average value of farm machinery on each farm is greater at 
Beaver than at Hyde Park. This is another reason for the fewer men 
and horses in proportion to acres of crops and number of animal units 
at Beaver than at Hyde Park. 

The value of farm buildings is slightly less at Beaver than at 
Hyde Park due in part, to warmer climate, more recent settlement, and 
fewer dairy cows. 

The average crop-growing season is 25 days shorter than at Hyde 
Park. The mean annual temperature is 4 8.5 degrees F. or about 1 de- 
gree higher than for Hyde Park. The temperature is warmer in summer 
and not so cold in winter at Beaver. The annual precipitation is only 
about 13 inches at Beaver. All the crops are irrigated. 

The Beaver farm-land begins at the base of the mountains on the 
east and south and extends out west and north to the bottom of the 
valley, where seepage and excess irrigation water has resulted in some 
of the low-lying land becoming too wet to be utilized in its present con- 
dition, for other purposes than permanent meadow or pasture. The 
land is practically level but slopes gently towards the bottom valley- 
land from the bench land. 



66 



Bulletin No. 177 



This land is in the Great Interior Soil Province (i). (See Fig. 15). 
The soil has the characteristics of arid soils in generaU-). 

The Fillmore National Forest is easily accessible to the cattle and 
sheep of the Beaver farmers (s). The Millard Desert affords winter 
sheep-range near at hand. However, these ranges are now stocked to 
their capacity, and must be handled more carefully or they will not 
even maintain their present carrying capacity. 

The population of the city of Beaver was 1899 in 1910(*). A large 
proportion of those persons in the population who were born in the 
United States came from other parts of Utah, and other western and 
middle western states, to Beaver. The foreign-born population is largely 
from northern Europe and Great Britain. Practically the same situation 
prevails here as was found at Hyde Park. 

The average number in the farm families on the farms at Beaver in 
1914 was 5.4. Of these 2 were less than Ifi years old and 3.4 over 16 
years of age. 

The average number of men employed per farm was 1.4. That 
is the operator's full time and the equivalent of 0.4 of a year of other 
man labor performed either by other members of the farm family or by 
hired help.' This is two and one-half months less man labor than was 
utilized at Hyde Park. 

Table XLIV. — Size of Family and Number of Cows Kept, 
Beaver, Beaver County, Utah, 1914 



a 



a 



■^ fc 

B^ 



fetS 



o o 



^ a 



o t„ 



fe ^ 



c 
O 

'"s, a 



All Farms 


1 48 


5.4 


49.4 1 


3.5 1 


45 1 


9.1 


Small 

Medium 

Large 


1 16 
1 15 
1 1^ 


3.2 
5.5 

7.5 


47.8 1 
47.3 1 
52.8 1 


2.6 
3.5 
4.3 1 


16 1 

13 1 

16 1 


8.8 
9.0 
9.5 



The cows shown in Table XLIV are in most cases just common grade 
shorthorn cows. Many of them were range cows that were milked only 
a few months. It was impossible from the records taken to get ac- 
curately the average number of cows milked on each farm for the year 
or 12 month basis. Records of the two largest range cattle operators, 
one reporting 96 cows and one 80 cows were omitted from the table be- 
cause it was so evident that their cows were not all milked even for a 



(i)Whitney, Milton, U. S. D. A., Bu. of Soils Bui. No. 55, (1919), 
pp. 83, 89-91, and 169-188, and soil map of U. S. accompanying it. 

(2)Coffey, George Nelson, U. S. D. A., Bu. of Soils Bui. No. 85, (1912), 
pp. 38-41. 

(3)See Fig. 17. 

(i) Thirteenth U. S. Census. 

(s)The Small Farm Families had from 1 to 4.9 members, the Medium 
Farm Families had from 5 to 6.9 members, and the Large Farm Fam- 
ilies included those having from 7 to 9 persons each. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farnwig m Utah 67 

rew weeks out of the year. Nevertheless the table shows correlation be- 
tween the size of farm family and number of cows kept for breeding 
and milk purposes. 

In 1914 there were on the average 46 productive animal units per 
man and 46 crop-acres per man. This seems to show that man labor 
was unusually efficient with stock and crops. But as before stated this 
is largely due to e^ctensive use of ranges for stock, and growing crops 
requiring but little man labor. It is also due in part to growing crops 
that permit of the use of machinery for most of the operations. There 
were 16 crop-acres per work horse here and only 14 at Hyde Park. The 
reasons for this apparent horse efliciency are the same as those stated 
above for man labor efficiency. 

Beaver City is 32 miles from Milford, the nearest railway station, 
but there are good dirt-roads the year round. The main auto highway 
between Salt Lake City and Los Angeles, called the Arrowhead Trail, 
•lasses thru Beaver. 

The greater part of the farm products arc marketed or fed on the 
farm. Livestock, however, are driven to the railroad and shipped to 
Los Angeles, Salt Lake, Ogden, Kansas City, Omaha, or Chicago. Eggs 
and farm made butter are sold to general merchandise stores at Beaver 
and are taken by them in auto-trucks to Milford for shipment to Salt 
Lake and elsewhere. Some eggs and butter are sold in the mining camps 
near Beaver. Some cream is sold in Beaver and some in the mining 
camps. Th few surplus potatoes are shipped via Milford. The distance 
from the individual farms to Beaver Post Office varies from one-eighth 
to four miles so none of them are a great distance from a local market. 

Of the 50 farms investigated in 1914, 48 reported all or a part of 
the land operated as being owned by the operator, 4 reported some land 
cash-rented, and 5 reported some land share-rented. The average area 
per farm of the owned land was 174 acres and about 3 acres cash and 
3 acres share rented, or 179 acres in the total farm area. The 4 farms 
reporting land rented for cash rented an average of 34 acres per farm 
or 136 acres in all. The 5 farms reporting land rented on shares rented 
125 acres in all or 25 acres per farm. 

The Thirteenth U. S. Census reports 319 farms in Beaver County 
having an average of 144.2 acres each. Of these farms 285 or 89.3 per 
cent were reported as operated by the owners, 28 by share tenants, 3 
cash tenants, 2 managers, and 1 not specified. 

The average value of land and buildings per acre was $43 in 1915. 
The average amount invested in real estate was $8,174 and the working 
capital was $4,471 on the average of 40 farms. Table XXIII shows that 
the value of Hyde Park land and buildings per acre was $10 6, or about 
2^2 times as much as at Beaver. The low price of land and extensive 
farming go together. The high value of land is a result of the greater 
])rofitableness of the more intensive type of farming. Farmers cannot 
afford to do extensive farming on high priced land. 

The facts given concerning water-tenure, water-rights, canal owner- 
ship and operatioin, and duty of water at Hyde Park also apply generally 
to Beaver. The irrigation practices are also similar in the two places. 

Only 7 farms out of 5 investigated reported mortgages. The inter- 
est rates paid varied from 5 to 9 per cent. One farmer paid 5 per cent, 
2 paid G per cent, 1 paid 7 per cent, 1 paid 8 per cent, and 2 paid 9 
per cent interest on the money obtained by mortgaging. This is an 
average of 7.14 per cent interest paid by these farmers. Using 7.14 per 
cent as interest rate and the average labor income of the 50 farmers In 
1914 was $92. Using 5 per cent interest the labor income was $396, 
using 5.5 per cent, labor income was $325, using 8.6 per cent, labor in- 
come was minus $114, and using 9 per cent labor income was minus 
$170. The labor income was greater in 1915 than in 1914, and greater 



'68 Bulletin No. 177 

in 1916 than in 1915 as shown by Tables III, IV, V, VI, and VII in 
Appendix. This was due largely to increase in prices of farm products. 

In 1916 the average labor income of the farmers of this area was 
greater than the average labor income of the farmers of the Hyde Park 
area. This variation in labor income was undoubtedly due largely to 
the changes in the relative prices of farm products and to the variation 
in the successes and the failures in each area of the various crop and 
ptock enterprises. 

The type of farming at Beaver is more extensive than at Hyde Park 
largely because of climate, soil, markets, National Forest ranges and 
winter ranges, and competing farm enterprises. Livestock, cattle and 
sheep, are the principle enterprises because of distance to market and 
low cost of livestock production. Alfalfa and other hay are the principal 
crops grown because of cattle and some sheep requiring winter feed. 
Other crops grown here are not important. 

MONROE, SEVIER COUNTY, UTAH 

Monroe is in Sevier County, three miles from Elsinore, the nearest 
railway station. Elsinore is on the Marysvale Branch of the Denver and 
Rio Grande, or Rio Grande Western Railroad. 

Monroe had a population of 1227 in 1910. Here as at Hyde Park 
and Beaver most of the farm families live in town. 

The elevation at Monroe is 5 3 80 feet above mean sea level or about 
900 feet higher than at Hyde Park. 

In spite of the fact that Monroe is more than 200 miles farther south 
than Hyde Park the average length of the growing season is 110 days, 
or 4 days less and two weeks later than at Hyde Park. The mean an- 
nual temperature is 48o F. or 0.5o F. less than for Beaver and about 
0.40 F. greater than for Hyde Park. The average annual precipitation 
is 8.34 inches, only 3.84 inches of which fall from April 1 to September 
oO. On this account dry-farming is not practised. All crops are irri- 
gated. The average date of last killing frost in spring is May 2 8, as 
compared with May 10 at Hyde Park. 

This area is in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province. (See Fig. 
15). A soil survey has been made in the Sevier Valley, the report of 
which gives a detailed description of the soils of this area(i)- 

The irrigation canals are owned and operated by the farmers who use 
the water. As in each of the areas already discussed there is here also 
some low wet meadow and pasture land due to over irrigation and seep- 
age water. 

There is a sugar factory at Austin which is three miles north of 
Monroe. This factory makes it possible for Monroe farmers to grow 
sugar-beets. A cooperative cheese factory is situated at Monroe so that 
dairying is also developing here. One of the main auto roads of the 
State running north and south passes thru town. The wagon roads are 
usually in good condition. The distance from the farm to market for 
the most important product varies from one-half to seven miles. 

Monroe is not as handicapped as Beaver respecting markets, nor is it 
quite as well situated as Hyde Park. But as with Beaver the main farm 
enterprises here are sheep and cattle because of the distance to any 
large market and the low cost of livestock feed. The special feature of 
this area is the raising of February lambs for the early Los Angeles 
market. (See Tables VIII to XII in Appendix). Los Angeles buyers 
are on the ground at selling time and usually pay fair prices for these 
early lambs. 

Table XLV shows that at Monroe as at Hyde Park there is a direct 

(1) Gardner, F. D., and Jensen, C. A., U. S. D. A., Bu. of Soils, Field 
Operations, (1900). 



So7ne Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



69 



Table XLV. — Size of Family, Acres Sugar-beets Raised, and 
Cows Milked, Monroe, Sevier County, Utah, 1914 






33 




a 




'-1 




OS 




l^ 


a 




s 


*-i 


o 








O 




j- 


^ 


"^ 


g 




3 




z 





o -> 

a* 

> <D 



o « 

o 
to ^^ 

(D O a> 
biO >> 

S a^ 

> r 









a <« 


"1 

5^ 


g« 


03 '^ 


£S 




L^ 


«M X 


O M 


03 S 




^.S 




U^ 


^ .2 

a =^ 


Si2 

> a; 




^ 


^m 






All Farms 


1 66 


6.5 


47.8 


54 


1 7.7 


64 


5.9 


Small 

Medium 


20 
26 

1 20 


3.8 
6.5 
9.2 


46 
48 
49 


14 
23 
17 


6 

7 
1 10 


19 
26 

1 19 


3 
6 

8 







correlation between the number in the farm family, the number of acr( 
of sugar-beets raised, and the number of cows milked. 

Table XLVI. — Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 66 Farms, 
Monroe, Sevier County, Utah, 1914 



1 

Item 


Farms 
Reporting 


Average Acres (-) 
66 Farms 


Average Acres ( - ) 

Farms 

Reporting 


Farm Area 

Owned by Operator 
Cash-Rented Land 
Share-rented Land.. 


66 
66 
12 

7 


64 

58 

4 

2 


64 

■ 58 

23 

17 


Crops 


6 5 

26 

4 

62 

2 


47 

7 
1 
6 
2 


48 




18 


Summer Fallow... 
Farmstead & Waste 
Uncultivated 


10 

6 

52 


Irrigated Crops 

Corn for Grain 

Spring Wheat 

Potatoes 

Barley 

Oats 

Hay 

Wild Hay 


66 

6 

52 

41 

2 

51 

11 



62 

55 

1 

1 

\ 

1 


46 

6 
1 

4 
1 


28 
6 










1 
7 
1 
5 
6 
12 



Alfalfa 

Sugar-beets 

Peaches 

Apples, not Bearing 
Arvples, Bearing ... 
Cherries 


30 

; 

2 
1 


Garden 

Beans 

Berries 


1 
1 


1 

1 

1 



(i)The Small Farm Families had from 2 to 5.9 members, the Me- 
dium Farm Families had from 6 to 7.9 members, and the Large Farm 
Families included those having from 8 to 13 persons each. 

(•;) Areas are given to the nearest acre. 



70 Bulletin No. 177 

The most important sales are sheep and cattle. Sheep is by far the 
most important source of income. The reasons for the comparative im- 
portance of the sheep industry here are the isolation from large markets 
for cash crops and the convenience to summer range on the Pishlake 
and Fillmore National Forests and winter range on the Millard and 
Beaver County Deserts which make possible a low cost of production. 
Dairying and sugar-beet raising are becoming more important as markets 
for cheese are found that permit payment of sufficiently high prices for 
milk, and as prices for sugar-beets raise in proportion to the cost of 
production. 

Based on acreage, the crops grown rank as follows: (1) alfalfa 1585 
acres, (2) sugar-beets 403 acres, (3) spring wheat 32 9 acres, (4) oats 
267 acres, (5) timothy and other hay 103 acres, (6) potatoes 51 acres, 
(7) rye 7 acres, (8) corn 3 acres, and (9) barley 2 acres. More than 
1)1 per cent of the land was growing hay most of which was alfalfa. 
Sugar-beets and some wheat were grown as cash crops. Oats, rye, and 
barley were grown for feed. The potatoes and corn were grown for 
home us^ and to supply the local market. 

The average labor income of the Monroe farmers in 1914 was $516 
with interest charged at 5 per cent, $363 with interest at 5.5 per cent, 
$132 with interest at 8.6 per cent, and $89 with interest figured at 9 
per cent. 

In 1914 these farms were less profitable than those at Hyde Park and 
more profitable than those at Beaver. In 1915 and 1916 however, these 
larms were more profitable than either those at Hyde Park or those at 
Beaver. This variation in profitableness is undoubtedly due to variation 
in the success of producing crops and stock and also to the variations in 
the market prices of the farm products. The high prices of wool and 
meat nave made the war years very profitable for the Monroe farmers. 

SANDY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH 

Sandy is about 20 miles south of Salt Lake City. In 1910 it had a 
population of 1037. Draper is south of Sandy. The farm business 
records treated in this area were taken in the townships of Sandy, Draper, 
Midvale, Jordan, and West Jordan. 

The elevation at Sandy is 4366 feet above mean sea level. 

The normal annual precipitation is 16 inches, 7 of which fall in the 
crop-growing season. There are 89 days with 0.01 inch or more pre- 
cipitation and the mean annual temperature is 51.4i> F. The number of 
rainy days, the amount of precipitation, and the mean annual tempera- 
ture are higher than for any other of the 8 areas in this study. As at 
Hyde Park, dry-farming is also practised here on land for which there 
is no irrigation water and on that which is poorly situated with reference 
to the water, provided the soil is of a character to produce profitable 
crops. The average growing season is 183 days, or is more than 30 days 
longer than in any other of the 8 areas. The average date of last killing- 
frost in the spring is April 19. 

This area is in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province. There has 
been a detailed soil survey made in this valley (i) but not all of this area 
was included in that survey. However, typical soils are described and 
are suggestive. The soil types identified are Jordan sandy loam, Bing- 
ham gravelly loam, Jordan loam, Jordan clay and clay loam, Jordan 
meadows, Jordan sand, Bingham stony loam, and Salt Lake sand. The 
farmers described the soils as clay, adobe clay, clay loam, sandy, sandy 
loam, clayey sandy loam, and black sandy loam. At Sandy the soil is 
predominantly sandy and sandy loam. Near the mountains it is coarser 

(1) Gardner, F. D., and Stewart, John, U. S. D. A., Bu. of Soils, Field 
Operations, (1899). 



Some Types of Irrigation Faryning in Utah 



71 



xr.VII. — Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 72 Farms, 
Sandy, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914 



Item 


Farms 
Reporting 


1 Average Acres (.)-^^^'-^^^%^"-^«"^ 
^2^-- i Re'^oVung 


Farm Area 

Owned by Operator 
Cash-rented Land.. 
Share-rented Land.. 


70 
14 
12 


105 105 

85 88 

7 38 

11 66 


Crops 

Pasture (woods).. 
Pasture 

(perm, tillable) 

Pasture 

(not tillable) 

Summer Fallow 

Farmstead & Waste. 


72 
11 

38 

25 
9 

72 
2 


56 

21 

4 

8 
6 
6 
3 


! 56 
139 

8 

23 

46 

6 

94 






Dry-farm Land 

Winter Wheat 

Barley 

Summer Fallow 


38 

12 

17 

9 


16 
9 
1 
6 


51 

5 

46 


Irrigated Crop-land 

Corn 

Potatoes 


72 

44 

68 

56 

61 

21 

12 

61 • 

31 

6 
14 

6 
14 
33 
20 
12 

5 
10 
21 

6 

3 


48 
3 
3 
7 

11 
2 
2 

14 
3 



1 
1 





1 






4 
3 


Spring Wheat 

Oats 

Hav 


9 

13 

7 


Timothy and Clover 
Alfalfa 


12 

17 


Squash 

Mangels 

Onions 


1 
1 



Apples, not Bearing 

Apples, Bearing 

Garden 

Berries , 

Apricots 

Peaches 


3 

2 
1 
2 
1 
2 
2 


Melons 
Carrots 
Peas 


1 
1 
2 



until at the base coarse gravel is found. When irrigated and well 
drained these soils are very fertile as evidenced by the crop yields. Some 
of the land is low and wet and crop yields are low on such fields. 

Table XI>VIII shows a direct correlation between the number in the 
farm families on the farm and the number of cows milked but does not 
show such correlation between size of family and number of acres of 
sugar-beets per farm. 

One reason there is not much correlation here between the size of 
farm family and acres of sugar-beets is because two fairly young farm- 
ers are exceptional in that they have a business very much larger than 
the average in every way and they fall in the class with medium-sized 



(1) Areas are given to the nearest acre. 



72 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XLVIII. — Size of Family, Acres Sugar-beets Raised, anfl 
Cows Milked, Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914 



a 







a 


o ^ 


c5 


^ a 


CH P 


S s- 


°5 


^s 


j;^ 


Q> CO 




be C 


^ •" 


03 S 


a 


33 ^ 


s 


!> 0) 


z 


-<fc 



fc <Ii 



a: 


m 


CO 


a 


CD 


gp 






S -2 


CO e 




feg 


fc O 


CQ 


?; s 


CM ^ 


° he 

.s 
atf 






s 


'Z 


< 


z 






All Farms | 

Small I 

Medium 1 

Large \ 



72 



5.9 I 45.9 



29 



7.5 I 70 



4.5 



24 I 3.4 I 44 
32 I 6.0 1 47 
16 1 9.6 I 45 



11 I 5 

12 1 10 
6 7 



22 I 2 

32 I 5 
16 i 7 



farm families. There are not enough farms in the experiment to over- 
come this abnormality. 

There is a great variety of crop and stock enterprises included in this 
district. Because of the climatic, market, soil, water, and transportation 
conditions, a wide selection of enterprises is offered these farmers. Each 
farmer of the aj-ea has his own set of conditions and he attempts to 
meet them to his best advantage. Consequently there is a great diversity 
of practices. Some farmers sell market milk in Salt Lake City. Some 
ship milk to creameries, some ship to cheese factories, and a few make 
butter on the farm and sell it at retail. Some farmers raise hay for the 
Salt Lake City market while others raise it to feed their own stock and 
even buy hay and grain in addition. The surplus poultry and eggs are 
sold to laborers of the smelters, or to private parcel post customers in 
Salt Lake City, or to a store at Sandy, Draper, or elsewhere. 

The average capital investment on 7 2 farms in 1914 was $15,82 8, or 
greater than for any other area in this study in spite of the fact that 
there were only 100 acres per farm or fewer than for any area here 
investigated. The two main sources of income on these 72 farms were 
grain $301, and "other livestock" (sheep, hogs, poultry, and bees), $272. 
There was only one source of income which, was equal to 10 per cent of 
the gross farm receipts and that was grain. There was an average of 
7.8 crops grown per farm and 5.8 sources of income per farm. But in 
spite of sales of fruits, vegetables, sugar-beets, potatoes, grain, hay, 
straw, dairy products, cattle, horses, sheep and wool, hogs, poultry and 
eggs, honey, miscellaneous receipts, and increase in feed and supply in- 
ventory; yet the average labor income was a minus $102. Ten farmers 
had an average labor income of $592 the same year. There are two main 
reasons why these farms do not yield as large a labor income as the 
Hyde Park farms. While these farms have an excellent climate they 
have not quite as good soil as shown by the crop yields. The second 
reason is that land values on some of these farms are not based solely 
on their present agricultural productiveness but partake of the nature of 
real estate speculations and as such include a possible future agricultural 
value and also a possible future value as city lots for residences. A 
third possible reason is that because of this speculative feature and also 
because the speculators are attempting to farm the land themselves, the 
farmers, as farmers, are inferior to those at Hyde Park. There is no 

(i)The Small Farm Families had from 1 to 4.9 members, the Me- 
riium Farm Families had from 5 to 7.9 m.embers, and the Large Farm 
Families included those from 8 to 14 persons each. 



So}ne Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



73 



doubt, however, that if one could get the actual increase in the value of 
land from year to year and add it to labor income one would find that 
these farmers were doing very well by holding the land for the rise in 
value and that the total farm profits are normal. (See Tables XIII to 
XVII ill Appendix.) 

FERRON, EMERY COUNTY, UTAH 

In 1910 Ferron had a population of 651. 

The elevation is 5500 feet above mean sea level. 



Table IL.- 



-Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 38 Farms, 
Ferron, Emery County, Utah, 1914 



Item 


Farms 
Reporting 


Average Acres ( > ) 
38 Farms 


Average Acres ( ' ) 

Farms 

Reporting 


Farm Area 

Owned by Operator 
Cash-rented Land.. 
Share-rented Land- 


38 

37 

5 

8 


106 

81 

5 

17 


106 
83 
39 
80 


Crops 


38 
1 
20 
16 
10 
37 
8 


51 

9 

11 
3 

21 

11 


51 
4 
17 
25 
12 


Pasture (woods).... 
Pasture (tillable).. 
Pasture (not " ).. 


Farmstead & Waste 


22 
51 






Irrigated Crops 

Corn 

Potatoes 

Spring Wheat 

Winter Wheat 

Barley 


38 

18 

27 

35 

1 

13 

36 

11 

8 

32 

1 

2 

3 

7 

20 

12 

1 
1 
1 
9 
1 


52 

1 
1 
9 

1 
9 
6 
2 
19 




2 
1 





1 




2 

1 

10 

2 

2 

9 

20 

12 

22 



7 



1 

3 

4 


Oats 

Hay 

Wild Hay 

Alfalfa 

Beets 

Beans 


Mangels 

Apples, Bearing... 

Seed Crops 

Garden 


Peaches 

Berries 


2 


3 




Cherries 


Mixed Orchard 

. Squtisli 



The normal annual precipitation is 9 inches. 5 of which fall in the 
trrowing season. The precipitation has varied from 3 to 13 inches an- 
nually. There are on the average only 37 days annually with 0.01 inch 
of precipitation. It is necessary to irrigate all crops in this area. 

Ranges are poor because of this low precipitation. The mean annual 
temperature is 46.1" F. There are only 107 days in the average growing 
season, June 2 to September 17. 



(M Areas are given to the nearest acre. 



74 



Bulletin No. 17: 



The soil is not so good here as in the Hyde Park area. Ferron is in 
the Rocky Mountain Valleys, Plateaus, and Plains Soil Province(i). 
^See Figure 15). This soil is fairly fertile, however, as shown by the 
crops produced. The soil and climate slightly handicap this area in 
comparison with Hyde Park. Market conditions are of first importance, 
in determining the general type of farming here. 

Table IL shows the tenure and use of land at Ferron in 1914. The 
Important crops are feed crops. 

Ferron is about 45 miles from Price, the railroad town where some 
of the farm and range products from this district are marketed or loaded 
for shipment to market. Range cattle are the chief source of income. 
Some cattle are grazed on the Manti National Forest but most of them 
are grazed on the prairies or plateaus south, east, and west of Ferron. 
These range cattle are fed in winter and raising feed is an important 
part of the farming operations in summer. The available winter range 
has too severe a climate for cattle and sheep so they must be fed all 
winter. Some farmers let the cattle stay out so long that severe storms 
often cause great losses from cold and starvation. A few farmers have 
been fairly successful with bees. 



Table L. 



-Size of Farm Family and Number of Milk and Beef Cows 
Kept, Ferron, Emery County, Utah, 1914 







■-" >. 









^ 




03 














a 


II 


CM ;-■ 
o o 


liE 


0-1 .-H f--) 


li 


o g 


t^ 


Z a 


§^o| 




isi 


^a 






fcX) G 


2a^ 

a; t. 
> d 


verag 
over 
Old 




--H O 




z 


> CD 






Z '^ 
■^ 






<0^ 








< 


All Farms 


40 


5.8 


47.7 


3.2 


38 


7.4 


Small - - 


14 


2.9 


45.2 


2.4 


14 


6.3 


Aledium 


12 


5.7 


49.4 


3.0 


10 


10.1 


Large 


14 


■ 8.8 


48.9 


4.2 


14 


6.5 



Fruits, such as apples, plums, and small bush fruits; vegetables; and 
melons are the main cash crops grown here. They are marketed at 
Sunnyside, Hiawatha, Scofield, and other mining camps that are from 
40 to 60 miles distant and also at the stores in Ferron. Peddlers gather 
vegetables, fruits, farm butter, and meat from the farmers and sell them 
in the camps. Several farmers from whom business records were ob- 
tained had peddled during many summers. This peddling was the most 
important single item included in their miscellaneous receipts. 

Hay and grain are also sold to some extent. Hay is usually baled 
and hauled to the camps or fed to a neighbor's cattle or sheep. Sugar- 
beets cannot be grown extensively because there is no sugar factory near. 
Dairying is limited because of a lack of market for dairy products. Not 
much care is given fruit trees because of the uncertainty of market and 
v/eather. A market as narrow as this cannot be satisfactory. 

The type of farming followed seems, in general, well adapted to the 
conditions. The average labor income in 1914 was $117 and the aver- 



). 



(i)Whitney, Milton, U. S. D. A., Bu. of Soils, Bui. No. 55, (1 
gives a detailed description of these soils. 

(2)The Small Farm Families had from 2 to 4.9 members, the Medium 
Farm Families had from 5 to 7.9 members, and the Large Farm Fam- 
ilies included those having from 8 to 12 persons each. 



So77ie Types of Irrigation Fanning in Utah 



75 



The average of all farms 
(See Tables XVIII to 



;ige for the 10 better-paying farms was $785. 
in 1915 was $119, and in 1916 it was $412. 
XXII in Appendix). 

Table L shows tliat there were 5.8 persons per family on the farms 
cit Ferron, and that the average age of the farm operators was 47.7 years. 
This table does not show a very decided correlation between the size of 
the farm family and the average number of cows per farm. This may 
oe due to the fact that there are not enough farms in each group as 
given in the table to establish a normal for each group. It is undoubted- 
ly affected by the fact that many of the cows listed as milk cows are 
nothing more than range cows, which have been milked for only short 
ueriods. 



WELLINGTON, CARBON COUNTY, UTAH 

Wellington had a population of 35 8 in 1910, and is situated about 12 
miles southeast of Price on the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad. The 
olevation is 5540 feet above mean sea level. The precipitation is only 
7 inches, of which but 4 Inches fall from April 1 to September 30. 

Table LI. — Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 2 6 Farms, 
Wellington, Carbon County. Utah, 1914 



Item 


Farms 
Reporting 


-Average Acres (n 
2 6 Farms 


Average Acres ( ' ) 

Farms 

Reporting 


Farm Area 


26 

25 

3 

1 


117 

92 
24 

1 


117 


Owned by operator 
Cash-rented Land.. 
Share-rented Land 


96 

212 
20 


Crops 

Pasture (woods).. 
Pasture (Tillable).. 
Pasture (not " ).. 
Summer Fallow.... 
Farmstead & Waste 
Uncultivated 


26 

\ 

4 

7 
2 6 
10 


50 
4 
2 
2 
4 
29 
30 


50 

100 

8 

16 

15 

29 • 
77 


Irrigated Land 

Corn 


26 

16 

24 

13 

1 

10 

17 

10 

22 

2 

5 

2 

1 

3 

s 

fi 
10 

1 


49 
2 

3 
2 

2 
5 
5 
29 


1 










3 


Potatoes 

Spring Wheat- .'... 

Winter Wheat 

Barley 

Oats 

Hay 

Alfalfa 

Beets 

Mangels 

Seed Crops 

Tomatoes 

Beans .: 

Cabbage 

Apples. Bearing 

Garden 

Turnips 

Berries 

Mixed Orchard 


3 
4 
2 

4 

8 

14 

34 

1 



12 

1 

1 
1 
1 
1 
n 
fi 



(')Areas are given to the nearest acre. 



76 



Bulletifi No. 17: 



The climate, soil,, topography, camp markets, and type of farming ; 
very similar to the conditions at Ferron, Emery County. 

Table LI shows the tenure and use of farm land in this area. 
Wellington, alfalfa is the main crop. 

Table LII shows the relation of size of farm family to the numl 
of cows per farm. 

Table LII. — Size 'of Family and Milk Cows Kept, Wellington, 
Carbon County, Utah, 1914 





CO 


<M 1^ 




cr 


tt-l 




a 






a CO 


c 


a 




II 


T-H 


=* o 


^ a 


S z. 


fe ft 




^u 




° 3 

CD CS 
2 fe 


°5 

33.2 ■ 


Si 

OS o 


CC CO fe 

O c5 s 
CO 03 o 


<4-i -is! 

c ::: 


C6 P 


CO 


' s 


> 0) 


(1^ 


ii 






2 


^0* 




'Z 


<; 



All Farms — 


26 1 


5.7 1 


2.8 1 


25 1 


2.8 


Small 

Medium 


.8 1 

9 1 
9 1 


2.3 1 

5.5 1 
8.8 j 


2.0 1 

2.5 1 

3.6 1 


8 1 

9 1 

s 1 


2.1 
2 6 


Large 


3.8 



The age of the farm operator was omitted because no record was 
obtained. There is correlation here between the number of persons in 
the farm family on the farm and the number of cows kept. This seems 
to be true in all areas where the number of milk cows was accurately 
taken. 

More livestock are raised here than at Ferron and more sheep in 
proportion to cattle, otherwise the two are about the same. The average 
labor income of the 26 Wellington farmers in" 1914 was $165. The 
average farm capital was $8391, and therefore interest at 8 per cent was 
$671. • (See Tables XVIII to XXII in Appendix). 

HINCKLEY, MILLARD COUNTY, UTAH 

Hinckley is situated in Millard County about 6 miles north and west 
of Oasis, which is tne nearest railway station. 

The 1910 U. S. Census gives the population of Hinckley as 553. 

The elevation is 4541 feet above mean sea level. 

The normal annual precipitation is 8 inches only 4 of which fall in 
the crop-growing season. Because of this slight rainfall dry-farming is 
not practised. All crops are irrigated and ranges are poor. However, 
considerably more rain than this falls in the mountains to the east. But 
they are too far away from Hinckley to be grazed by Hinckley stock. 

This area is in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province. (See Figure 
15). The soil is not so fertile as at Hyde Park and is more inclined to be 
alkaline. Clay and clay loam predominate altho there is some sandy 
loam reported. The land in general is flat. Often it is too flat to irrigate 
conveniently. Wlien such is the case underground drainage is poor and 
often alkali spots appear. 



(i)The Small Farm Families had from 1 to 4.9 members, the Me- 
dium Farm Families had from 5 to 6.9 members, and the Large Farm 
Families included those having from 7 to 11 persons each. 



Some Tijves of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



77 



Table LIII shows direct correlation between size of family and cows 
per farm. 

Table LIII. — Size of Farm Family and Number of Milk Cows Kept, 
Hinckley, Millard County, Utah, 1914 






S 

S a 

tw O 

o '-' 

^^ 

a; 



o S 



!> rt 



03 

ill 




« c; n 


fc u 


^^^ 


«w ,« 


0)^ C. 


!v^ 


III 




?. ■- 



S "^ 





1 59 


6.6 


43.5 


3.1 


57 


4.5 










1 19 


3.8 

7.2 

. 9.4 


37.7 
45.0 
47.9 


2.1 
2.7 
5.0 


18 
25 
14 


3.4 


Medium 


1 25 


4.4 


Large 


1 15 


6.0 



Table LTV. 



-Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 59 Farms. 
Hinckley, Millard County, Utah, 1914 



Item 


■ Farms 
Reporting 


Average Acres ( - ) 
59 Farms 


Average Acres (-) 
Farms 
Reporting 




59 

58 

1 

6 


152 

145 

3 

5 


152 


Owned by Operator 
Cash-rented Land.. 
Share-rented Land 


148 

186 

46 


Crops 


09 

14 
18 
7 
22 
59 
35 


52 
11 
8 
6 
5 
9 
61 


52 


Pasture (woods).. 
Pasture (Tillable).. 
Pasture (not " ).. 

Summer Fallow 

Farmstead & Waste 
Uncultivated 


46 

27 

50 

13 

9 

103 






Ungated Land 

Coru 

Potatoes 

Spring Wheat 

Winter Wheat 

Barley 

Rye 

Oats 

Hay 

Alfalfa 

Seep Crops 

Beets 


59 
24 
19 
36 

18 

9 

21 
8 

56 
4 
3 
4 


51 
1 


7 



1 
2 

3 
3 4 






2 

1 

11 

11 

6 

7 

7 

22 

36 

5 

3 

1 




Garden 


Mixed Orchard 



(')The Small Families had from 2 to 5.9 members, the Medium Farm 
Families had from 6 to 8.9 members, and the Large Farm Families 
included those having from 9 to 11 persons each. 

(-')Ai'pas avf liivoii to thf nnarest acre. 



78 Bulletin No. 177 

At the time these records were taken there was no sugar factory in 
this district; tlierefore no sugar-beets were grown. Dairying was limited 
because of marlcet conditions, the great distance to haul cream, etc. Some 
farmers milk a few cows and the farm families make butter which is sold 
at the town stores or traded there for groceries. Some poultry and eggs 
are also traded for groceries. 

Table LIV shows the tenure and use of farm land at Hinckley. The 
main sources of income on the average are (1) alfalfa seed, (2) alfalfa 
hay and other hay, and (3) cattle. The average receipts from each of 
these respectively were in 1914, alfalfa seed $340, hay $244, and cattle 
.1*186. The growing of alfalfa seed on most of the farms of this area is 
quite a gamble. On a few farms a fairly good crop is obtained each year. 
When a crop of seed is obtained the farmer makes a very good labor 
income but when the crop is left for seed and the seed fails little use 
can be made of it and labor income in such cases is sometimes a minus 
quantity. Some grain is sold and a few surplus potatoes are raised in 
normal years. In short, Hinckley is a distinct and separate community 
of farmers. The area feeds itself but its clothes, household-goods, and 
other necessaries it must purchase outside of the community. It pays for 
these purchases largely with alfalfa seed, hay, cattle, farm butter, surplus 
i^ggs, farm dressed pork, a few horses, and personal services. 

The type of farming followed is fairly well adapted to the conditions 
and is moderately profitable. The average labor income of 5 9 farmers in 
1914 was $32 3. The same year there were ten farmers who had an 
average labor income of $1403. The average labor income in 1915 was 
$104, and in 1916 it was $468. (See Figures 1 to 21 in the Text, and 
Tables XXIII to XXVII in Appendix). 

PLEASANT GROVE, UTAH COUNTY, UTAH 

Pleasant Grove had a population of 1618 in 1910. 

The elevation is 4532 feet above mean sea level. 

The normal annual precipitation is 15 inches (i), 6 of which fall in 
the growing season. The absolute lowest annual precipitation recorded 
is 9 inches and the absolute highest precipitation recorded is 22 inches. 
There are on the average 66 days annually with 0.01 inch or more 
precipitation. Dry-farming is successfully practiced, here. The principle 
dry-farm crops are wheat and alfalfa. The mean annual temperature is 
49.70 F. This is higher than for Hyde Park but lower than for Sandy. 
The warmest temperature recorded in any of the 8 areas is 10 50 F. and 
that was recorded for this area. The avergae crop-growing season has 
145 days, or a few less than Hyde Park and 35 to 40 less than Sandy, 
although situated further south than either of these districts. The 
average date of last killing frost in spring is May 12, or about the same 
as for Hyde Park but a little earlier than Beaver and much later than 
Sandy. The absolute latest date of killing frost in spring Is June 29, or 
about the same as at Hyde Park and Monroe. The climate here is affected 
by Utah Lake. 

This area is situated in the Great Interior-basin Soil Province. A 
detailed soil survey has been made of the area (2). The following soil types 
are distinguished: Maricopa stony loam, Caricopa gravelly loam, Jordan 
clay, Fresno sand, Jordan loam, Jordan sandy loam, Salt Lake loam, and 

(i)There is no U, S. Weather Bureau Station at Pleasant Grove. The 
information given here is recorded for Provo which is the station having 
a climate very similar to Pleasant Grove and is situated in the township 
just south of the Pleasant Grove township. 

(2) Sanchez, Alfred M., U. S. D. A., Bu. of Soils, Field Operations. 
(1903). 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



79 



the gravel areas. These same soil types, except one, are found in Salt 
Lake county and are among those identified in the Sandy area. The 
best sugar-beet soil is the Jordan sandy loam, and the Jordan loam is the 
second best soil for this crop. 

Most of the irrigation water is taken out of American Fork Creek but 
it is inadequate to irrigate the land of the area. Considerable land west 
of Pleasant Grove is irrigated by flowing wells. A small creek enters the 
valley east of Pleasant Grove, and furnishes irrigation water for some of 
the farms of this area. 

The railroad transportation facilities are good. The San Pedro, Los 
Angeles, and Salt Lake Railroad and the Rio Grande Western traverse the 
area from north to south. The electric interurban road from Preston, 
Idaho, thru Logan, Brigham City, Ogden and Salt Lake City, runs thru 
Pleasant Grove to Provo. There are good auto roads running north, east, 
south, and west from the town. Sugar-beets are shipped from here to 
the Lehi factory. 

The Wasatch National Forest to the east of town offers splendid 
grazing for cattle and sheep for about 8 months during the year. More 
cattle than sheep were kept on this range during the past few years 
because they have been more profitable(i). In many respects the con- 
ditions here are similar to those at Hyde Park. 

Table LV. — Size of Family, Acres of Sugar-beets Raised, and 
Cows Milked, Pleasant Grove, Utah County, Utah, 1916 



a 


a 


11 

2 u 


o o 

ft. 


CO 

a 


1% 


CO 

a CO 

n 


^ u 




a 




si 
IS 


ho ft 

H 






M 




<l 


1? 



All Farms | 

Small 1 

Meaium i 

Large 1 



56 



5.8 I 43. i 



41 I 



.2 .| 55 



4.8 



3.0 
4.7 

8.4 



44.0 I 10 
43.0 I 19 
43.0 I 13 



Table LV does not show a very striking direct correlation between size 
of farm family, acres of sugar-beets per farm, and number of cows per 
farm. This may in part be due to the new farms included in the small and 
large family groups, also to the lack of carefully distinguishing between 
the milk and range cows. 

Table LVI shows the tenure and use of land in the Pleasant Grove 
area. 

Table XXVIII in the appendix shows that the land on the average farm 
was valued at $5,019, the buildings $1,235, livestock $892, machinery 
$350, and feed and supplies $296, making a total capital per farm of 
$7,792. The sources of income in the order of importance were in 1916, 



(1) Third Annual Report, Utah State Bu. of Immigration, Labor and 
Statistics, 1917, p. 185. 

(^)The Small Farm Families had from 1 to 4.9 members, the Medium 
Farm Families had from 5 to 6.9 members, and the Large Farm Families 
included those having from 7 to 12 persons each. 



80 



Bidletm No. 177 



Table LVI. — Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 5 6 Farms, 
Pleasant Grove, Utah County, Utah, 1916 









Average Acres(i) 


Item 


Farms 


.'Vverage Acres(i) 


Farms 




Reporting 


5 6 Farms 


Reporting 


l<'arm Area 


56 


68 


68 


Owned by Operator 


56 


54 


54 


Cash-renteu Land-... 


11 


6 


31 


Share-rented Land- 


15 


8 


28 


Crop Area 


56 


35 


38 


Pasture (woods).. 


11 


13 


65 


Pasture (Perm, till.) 


23 


4 


11 


Pasture (not " ) 


13 


3 


13 


Summer Fallow 


7 


3 


19 


Farmstead & Waste 


53 


4 


4 


Uncultivated 


5 


4 


40 


Drv-farm Land 


28 


6 


— 


Winter Wheat 


14 


2 


9 


Barley — 


17 


1 


3 


Summer Fallow.... 


7 


3 


19 


Irrigated Crop Land 


56 


33 


— 


Beans 


6 





1 


Corn 


32 


2 


3 


Potatoes 


48 


1 


1 


Spring Wheat 


44 


4 


5 


Oats 


41 


3 


4 


Hay .- 


30 


5 


10 


Alfalfa 


48 


10 


12 




2 





2 


Beets 


43 


5 


6 


Garden 


9 








Apples, Bearing. ... 


35 


1 


2 


Apples, not Bearing 


9 


.1 


8 


Mixed Orchard 


33 


1 


2 


Berries 


17 





1 


Peas 


5 





1 



sugar-beets $298, Cattle sales $186, miscellaneous receipts $178, dairy 
products $170, grain $141, potatoes $133, fruit $126, increase in feed and 
supply inventory $87, swine sales $82, poultry and eggs $57, increase in 
livestock inventory $5 6, hay $41, horse sales $36, increase in machinery 
inventory $24, other crop sales $18, increase in inventory of land and 
buildings $13, and sheep sales $2, a total of $1,649 from 17 sources. The 
farm expenses amounted to $608 and labor income $418. There have been 
a number of publications dealing with the type of farming in this valley, 
four of these deal with the Provo Area only, but much of the information 
is applicable to Pleasant Grove(2). (See Table XXVIII *in Appendix). 

(1) Areas are given to the nearest acre. 

(-^Thompson, E. H., and Dixon, H. M., U. S. D. A., B. P. I. Bui. No. 
117, (July. 1914); Connor. L. G., U. S. D. A. Farm Mgt. Bui. No. 582, 
(Jan., 1918); Connor, L. G., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. No. 165. (Oct., 
1918) ; Moorhouse, L. A. and Others, U. S. D. A. Farm Mgt. Bui. No 693, 
(July,1918). 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 81 

GENERAL SUMMARY 

1. Type of farming as here used means kind or example of farming. 

2. The ideal type of farming for any community at any one time is 
that which combines crops, livestock, machinery, buildings, land, water, 
labor, and management of such kinds and grades, and in such amounts, 
numbers and proportions, and in such ways as to yield the highest long- 
rime average net returns per unit of management or per manager. 

3. Types of farming compete with each other on farms as do also in- 
dividual, crop and stock enterprises and the experiences of farmers tend 
to establish that type which is best suited to each farm and each district. 

4. It is difficult in many cases to change readily from one type of farm- 
ing to another. 

5. The type of farming most profitable in a community this year may 
not be the best a few years from now because of varying economic condi- 
tions. 

6. It is in the inter-relations of all the factors both natural and eco- 
nomic that the type of farming for any community or any particular farm 
is determined and as a rule that found in any community which has been 
settled for 50 years or more is not far from what it should be. 

7. The purpose of this investigation is to show some of the inter-rela- 
tions of the natural and economic factors as they affect some types of 
farming in Utah. 

8. The original data here presented were collected by the writer and 
assistants during the years 1914, 1915, and 1916, when he was in the em- 
ploy of the United States Department ofAgriculture and the Utah Agricul- 
tural College. 

9. The Survey Method was used in collecting these data. 
10. A study of type of farming has the following phases: 

(1) Enumeration and description of the individual crop and stock 
enterprises. 

(2) Determination of the magnitude and importance of each separ- 
ate enterprise. 

(3) Determination of the combinations of the enterprises. 

(4) Determination of the proportions in which the enterprises are 
combined. 

(5) Analysis of the factors affecting the choice of the enterprises 
and their combinations. 

HYDE PARK. CACHE COUNTY. UTAH 

11. Hyde Park is in Cache Valley in Cache County in the north- 
central part of Utah. 

12. The elevation at Hyde Park is about 4.507 feet above mean sea 
level. 

13. Hay is the principal feed crop of the area and is used for dairy 
cows, young stock, and work horses. On the average farm of the area 
there are 13 acres of alfalfa and only 7 acres of other hay. Oats are also 
.srrown for feed. Sugar-beets, dry-farm wheat, and barley are the cash 
crops. Potatoes are grown for farm-home use and to supply the local 
market. There was not much change in type of farming during the three 
years of this investigation. The wet low-lands are pastured or are in 
meadow. Some of the foothills are also pastured. Thus climate, irriga- 
tion, and drainage have determined location and extent of pasture. 

14. It is largely on account of the pasture conditions at Hyde Park 
that dairying is so important in this district. 

15. Wheat is a more profitable dry-farm crop than barley at Hyde 
Park. 



82 Bulletin No. 1 77 

16. The reasons why alfalfa is grown on land suited "for sugar-beets 
are: 

(a) Alfalfa is needed for livestock feed. 

(b) Alfalfa gives a better labor distribution. 

(c) Alfalfa makes it possible to do some productive work in winter, 
(dj It saves paying out an excessive amount of wages for hired 

help in summer. 

(e) Alfalfa is needed in the crop rotation. 

(f) The combination consequently nets a greater annual income. 

17. Oats and spring wheat are both grown for the following reasons: 

(a) Oats are grown mainly for horse feed. 

,(b) Spring wheat is grown on irrigated land as a cash crop. 

(c) Growing both gives a better labor distribution. 

(d) Alternating the two gives higher yields. 

(e) Wheat on alfalfa sod before sugar-beets allows alfalfa roots 
and crowns to decompose to a greater extent, which facilitates 
beet culture the following year. 

(f) Growing both saves labor or uses it more productively, gives 
better crop yields, helps in the culture of beets, and conse- 
quently increases the net annual income. 

18. The reasons why 9 to 10 acres of beets are grown and less than 1 
acre of potatoes on the average Hyde Park farm are as follows: 

(a) These two crops compete for land, labor, capital, and manage- 
ment. 

(b) Ten or 11 acres of these intensive crops are about all the 
average farm family can handle conveniently. 

. (c) A greater use of unpaid family labor may be utilized to ad- 
vantage on the sugar-beet crop and the acres raised varies di- 
rectly as the number in the farm family on the farm. 

(d) The soil at Hyde Park is better adapted to beets than to 
potatoes. 

(e) The potato market is practically limited to the local demand, 
while sugar, the final product of beets, competes on the world 
markets. 

(f) The sugar factory companies contract in advance of planting 
time to pay the farmers a definite price per ton for the beets, 
which certainty of price takes much risk from the farmer and 
makes farming more stable. 

(g) Potatoes are grown only for home use and the local market 
and 1 acre is sufficient to supply this demand. 

(h) It is because of the above conditions that some beets and po- 
tatoes are grown at Hyde Park. 

(i) Because of these conditions beets are on the average more 
profitable, and nine or ten times as many acres are devoted to 
the crop as are devoted to potatoes. 

19. The number of Productive Animal Units seems to be increasing on 
[he Hyde Park farms. 

20. Heifers are raised to replace the dairy cows and because of cheap 
feed and otherwise low cost of production a few are sold as cows or heifers. 

21. On the average there were about 7.4 units of dairy cows kept per 
farm. No more are kept because of the limited pasture, and also because 
the farm family usually does all the milking and the size of the herds 
varies as the number in the farm family. The larger families milk the 
most cows. However, these farmers are not milking as many cows as 
they might with as large families as they have. 

22. Some range cattle are kept because of the availability of some 



So7ne Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 83 

range land for grazing purposes on the Cache National Forest Reserve 
and because the milk cows cannot use the ranges to advantage. 

23. Colts are raised both tor work and for sale. Relatively cheap feed 
makes it possible to raise colts to sell. 

24. On the average there is one work horse to 14 or 15 acres of crops. 
The better paying farms on the average have one work horse to each 15 
to 19 acres of crops. This is not an especially efficient use of work horses 
but is undoubtedly due in part to the brood mares, the rather intensive 
crops grown, and the lack of usable machinery for many of the opera- 
tions on the sugar-beet crop. 

25. A cow pony is kept to use in driving the cows to and from pasture. 

26. On all farms a total of 46 sheep including lambs are kept as 
scavengers. This is less than an average of 1 sheep per farm. 

27. Hogs are raised for home use mainly. One reason why more are 
not raised is because all the farm homes and buildings are in town and a 
herd of hogs would be very undesirable under these conditions. 

28. Hens are kept mainly to supply the farm homes with eggs and 
meat. More poultry in town where homes are close together would be a 
nuisance. 

2 9. Hogs and hens are fed largely on table scraps, grain screenings, 
skim milk, and other waste-feeds. Bran and shorts are sometimes fed to 
hogs for a short period before butchering. These conditions tend to make 
cheap meat and eggs for family use. 

30. There are three features of special significance in this area. 

(a) Most of the land is irrigated and most of the farmers raise 
sugar-beets on a part of this irrigated land and milk a few 
cows. Water for the extension of irrigation is limited. Suit- 
able pasture for milk cows is limited. The sugar-beet area 
and the number of cows milked vary directly with the num- 
ber of persons in the farm family. 

(b) Dry-farming is practised as a means of extending or increas- 
ing the size of the farm business. Even the dry-farm laud 
has been taken up by the local farmers and is no longer avail- 
able to entry. 

(c) Grazing on the Cache National Forest offers some good op- 
portunities to a few farmers, but even these advantages are 
absorbed by a few men and the ranges are stocked to their 
capacity. 

31. Sugar-beets and wheat are raised instead of raising more pasture, 
barley, oats, and alfalfa as feed for livestock because: — 

(a) Raising cash crops utilizes the available summer labor to good 
advantage. 

(b) The sugar,-beet crop especially makes labor for school children. 

(c) The combination of livestock and these cash crops makes a 
more diversified and better balanced farm business and there- 
fore a safer and more desirable business for the average 
farmer than the more specialized livestock farming. 

(d) The combination is on the average more profitable than the 
specialization. 

32. The balance of the farm business is fair. No regular system of 
crop rotations is practised. The cultivated crops receive about 6 tons of 
manure per acre per year, or 30 tons every 5 years. With the abundance 
of minerals in the virgin soil the fertility has been maintained and even 
increased in some cases. About 4 to 4 5 per cent of the farm receipts 
are from crops, 30 to 40 per cent from stock and stock products, 16 per 
cent from increase in inventory, and 9 per cent from miscellaneous sources 



84 Bulletin No. 177 

such as outside labor. On the average there were 3.6 crop acres per pro- 
ductive animal unit. This ratio furnishes ample feed for stock and allows 
growing cash crops as well. 

33. The 52 farms, in 1914, had an average farm capital of $13,642; 
farm receipts, $2,510; farm area, 105 acres; crop acres, 54; acres sugar-^ 
beets, 8.5; productive animal units, 14.8; milk cows, 7.5; work horses, 4; 
and man labor equivalent, 1.6. One of the main reasons for the few 
acres is found in the small farms originally taken up by squatters in 
1859. Another reason is the difficulty of overcoming the obstacles to 
increasing the number of acres. 

34. The modern farm machinery is in general use on these farms. 
The average value of machinery per farm is about $420, or $5 to $9 per 
crop acre. The larger farms have more farm machinery, but the ma- 
chinery cost is less per acre than on the smaller farms. It is likely that 
when a sugar-beet thinner and a sugar-beet topper are perfected that the 
acreage of these crops may be greatly increased. 

35. The type of farming followed and the size of the farm business 
largely determine the kind and size of farm buildings required. At Hyde 
Park the buildings are fairly well adapted to the needs. It has happened 
at Hyde Park that because of insufficient storage space, grain and pota- 
toes have of necessity been sold in the fall at harvest time, when if stor- 
age space had been available they would have been held until winter or 
spring. 

36. The average value of dwelling houSe in 1914 was $1335. The 
larger farms have better dwellings and better barns than the smaller farms 
and yet the shelter cost per animal unit is less on the larger farms than 
on the smaller farms. 

37. Climate is the most important single factor in determining the 
type of farming in all parts of Utah. It determines whether irrigation is 
necessary, whether dry-farming will be successful, and that the desert shall 
remain a desert. 

3 8. There are 151 days in the crop-growing season at Hyde Park; 16 
inches is the mean annual precipitation; 7 inches fall annually between 
April 1 and September 30; the mean annual temperature is 47.6° F., 
with a mean difference between night and day of 21.9° F.; the mean 
humidity during the day is about 50 per cent; and the annual rate of 
evaporation from a free-water surface is about 45 to 55 inches. 

39. Topography is an important factor- in determining the type of 
farming in Utah in general, and on individual farms. It is estimated that 
40 per cent of the area of Utah will never be cultivated on account of the 
mountains. These mountains furnish grazing for livestock, and in Hyde 
Park anti many other areas affect greatly the type of farming. 

40. The Cache County farm soils are in the Bonneville beds and vary 
from gravel, small gravel, and light sand thru all grades to the heaviest 
and most tenacious clays. The varying soil types make it possible to 
diversify the farm business at Hyde Park even more than would a single 
soil type of good quality. 

41. The control of grazing on the National Forests by government 
officials has (1) eliminated to a certain extent free competition in the 
use of grazing lands, (2) established a privileged class of farmers, and 
(3) largely determined the type of farming on many farms adjacent to 
the National Forests. 

42. The carrying capacity of the Cache National Forest is estimated 
at 17 acres per animal unit, and it is at present stocked to its carrying 
capacity. The average grazing season on this Reserve is 5 to 8 months. 
The grazing on National Forests affects greatly the number of animal 
units kept by farmers. The better the grazing facilities the greater the 
number of animal units kept. 

43. Persons are better able to do that type of farming with which they 



Some Types of Irrigation Fanning in Utah 85 

are familiar. The origin and training of the farm population are there- 
fore important in studying types of farming. Most of the parents of the 
native-born white persons of foreign parentage at Hyde Park and also 
most of the foreign-born whites came from Great Britain and the coun- 
tries of northwestern Europe. The type of farming at Hyde Park is 
similar in many respects to that of these foreign countries. 

44. Hyde Park farms are family-sized farms. One manager is all that 
is required on any of them and he does most of the farm work. 

45. The average number of persons in the farm families included in 
this area was 7.4, but only 6 of these persons made their home on the 
farm. The Hyde Park farm families are larger than the average Cache 
County farm family. The average farm family in Cache County is larger 
than the average for the State and the average for the State is greater 
than for the United States. 

46. The size of farm family has a definite relationship to the type of 
farming practised as is suggested by the fact that on those farms with 
large families more acres of sugar-beets are raised and more milk cows 
are kept than on the farms with medium or small farm families. The 
total crop acres are also greater on the farms with large families. 

4 7. The family income is greater on the farms with large families 
than on the farms with medium-sized or small families. 

48. These facts indicate that the entire farm family is the basic unit 
around which the farm business is organized. 

49. There is great variation in the value of the farm home. 

50. There is. however, no correlation between the value of the farm 
iiome and labor income or farm income. 

51. Not only family labor but also hired labor affects type of farm- 
ing. The possibility of hiring school children for beets affects greatly 
ihe acreage grown at Hyde Park. 

52. At Hyde Park the total man labor equivalent for the average farm 
was 1.6. This is equivalent to 1 man, the operator, twelve months or 1 
year, and 7 months, and G days of additional man labor. A large part of 
the additional labor was furnished by the farm family and the remainder 
hired. A considerable part of that hired was for beet work and hay and 
grain harvest. 

5 3. Sugar-beets and potatoes conflict in labor time. This is one rea- 
son why potatoes are not grown more extensively here. 

54. The crop acres per man at Hyde Park (33:1) is comparable with 
that of the acres of improved land per person ten years old and over 
gainfully engaged in agriculture in Utah, 1909 (37.4:1). kt Hyde Park, 
however, persons 10 years old were not considered men nor was pasture 
counted as crop acres. 

55. Utah is not advantageously situated with respect to world markets, 
and prices of exported products are therefore comparatively low and 
prices of imported products are relatively high. 

56. Where the market cannot be adapted to the type of farming 
otherwise best for an area, the type of farming must be adapted to the 
market. 

57. The development of dairying followed the establishment of the 
condensed milk factories, creameries, and cheese factories. The growing 
of sugar-beets followed the erection of the sugar factories. The estab- 
lishment of packing plants at Salt Lake and Ogden have stimulated pork 
production. As a result of higher livestock prices, less free range, and 
better livestock, more care is being given livestock on the farms. Be- 
cause land is being used for cultivated crops and also because more hay 
is used for livestock feed there is less hay being exported than formerly. 

58. The fact that Hyde Park is I'^/z miles east of the branch line sta- 
tion of the Oregon Short Line Railroad instead of nearer a main line 
station is a handicap in shipping to distant markets. 



86 Bulleti7i No. 177 

59. The Utah and Idaho Central, Electric Railway, runs thru the 
town limits and has facilitated greatly local shipments to Preston, Idaho; 
Logan, Brigham, Ogden, Salt Lake, and Provo, Utah; and intermediate 
points. 

60. The State Highway passes thru the Hyde Park township. This 
facilitates milk hauling and the local transportation of other farm 
products. 

61. There were no tenant farms at Hyde Park, but 23 of the 52 far- 
mers investigated, rented additional land. 

62. Share tenancy is more common than cash tenancy in Cache 
County as a whole, but at Hyde Park 18 out of the 23 farmers who rented 
additional land, paid cash rent for it. This fact indicates that the Hyde 
Park farmers on the average are more prosperous than the average Cache 
County farmer and also that the type of farming does not lend itself so 
readily to share renting. 

63. Pasture land rented for from $2 to $3 per acre and cultivated crop 
land for from >f i to $z!l per acre. The latter figure was paid for sugar- 
beet land. The average cash rent per acre was $9.13. The dry-farm 
wheat crop was divided, four-tenths to landlord and six-tenths to tenant. 
Hay and oats on irrigated land was rented for one-half share. On one 
patch of irrigated wheat the tenant got a little more than one-half, and 
on one patch of irrigated alfalfa the tenant received five-ninths of the 
crop. 

64. The land is rented by these farmers to increase the size of the farm 
business and no doubt here, as elsewhere, renting is an intermediate step 
in the process of becoming owners of the land rented. 

65. The small percentage of tenancy here is due to a number of cir- 
cumstances and conditions. The main reasons are as follows: 

( 1 ) The country is new and it has been easy to become a farm 
owner without tenancy, by (a) homesteading, or (b) pur- 
chasing. 

(2) The farms are comparatively small, and therefore the total 
capital necessary to purchase a farm is not so great as to be 
prohibitive to the moderately well-to-do. 

(3) The type of farming followed is one which is conducive to 
ownership, is not attractive to tenants, and is not well adapted 
to tenant farming. 

(4) The great increase in the value of the land has been a propell- 
ing influence toward land ownership. Tenancy in Utah, how- 
ever, is gradually increasing. 

66. Up to July 1, 1918, there had been only 8,572,842 acres, or 16.3 
per cent, of all land in Utah entered for settlement. Of this area 3,397,699 
acres were reported by the Thirteenth Census as land in farms. 

67. The amendments to the Desert Land Laws and the passage of the 
Stock-raising Homesteads Acts have made it practicable to settle a con- 
siderable area of the remaining land of the State. These laws have there- 
tore affected greatly the types of farming in the State. 

6 8. Land values are largely determined by type of farming. The 
agricultural value of a piece of land is the capitalized agricultural income 
of that land with all future increases in its value discounted to-date; and 
the income of the land is obviously a result of the type of farming 
practised. 

69. The individual farmer, on land of a given value, must, however, 
follow a type of farming on that land that is profitable or else he will 
rail. 

70. Land values at Hyde Park are higher than the average state value. 

71. As population increases or the relative prices of farm products 
rise, the land is more thoroly and intensively utilized and land values 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 87 

become greater. As interest rates become less or the value of the dollar 
•■lecreases land rises in value. 

72. About two-thirds of the crop land at Hyde Park is irrigated and 
ue other one-third is dry-farm land. An extension of agriculture is lim- 
ited by water and mountains or by climate and topography. 

7 3. At Hyde Park, as is common in Utah, the farmers own and 
operate the canal systems furnishing irrigation water. Water-rights in 
canals were obtained in payment for services in constructing the canals 
or were bought from the original OAvners. The amount of water that each 
farmer gets each year is often very variable and uncertain but is usually 
sufficient to mature his crops. The annual cost per share of stock or per 
acre of land irrigated was about 50c in 1909. 

74. A good irrigating stream for the average man under average con- 
ditions is from 2 to 5 second-feet. 

75. Three to 5 acre-inches is enough for a good irrigation. Two and 
one-half acre-feet is the maximum needed in Utah in addition to the pre- 
cipitation to produce a crop if it is applied at the proper season, May 1 
to August 31. 

76. One second-foot will irrigate 70 to 160 acres in the four months 
of the irrigation season. 

77. The water-master has control over the distribution of water among 
the farmers and is therefore a factor in determining the type of farming. 

78. The crops grown at Hyde Park do not as a rule require irrigation 
water at the same time and are therefore not competing crops in this 
respect. The nearest to competition is between potatoes and sugar-beets. 

79. Lack of knowledge of the water requirements of plants, the duty 
of irrigation water, and the proper time to irrigate each crop may affect 
*ype of firming by showing one crop more profitable than another. 
Proper irrigation may prove the opposite crop to be more profitable. 
Much depends upon the knowledge of the irrigation farmer, the amount 
of water in the streams, and the division of the water by the water-master. 

80. The type of farming followed depends to some extent upon the 
farmers' ability to get capital or money. Men at Hyde Park and else- 
where in Utah are not going into the livestock business as early as they 
would like because of insufficient funds, and yet these farms are not as 
heavily mortgaged as the average farm in Cache County, nor the average 
of the State of Utah, nor the average of the United States. 

81. With the facilities at hand some of the Hyde Park farmers might, 
with safety, extend their farming operations by obtaining additional 
capital by mortgaging their farms. When the interest rate is 5% per 
cent this practice would undoubtedly increase the average labor income 
of these formers. 

82. Tbp average estimated total cost of farm loans on personal security 
in TUah, 1014. including interest, discounts, bonuses, commissions, and 
other extra ch.nrprs wfs 10.4 per cent. For farmers who have to pay this 
high charge f^r the use of capital, to borrow in order to enlarge the 
renerni farm l)usiness is of doubtful practicability. 

83. Farm profits are largely determined by the type of farming prac- 
tised. The most profitable type of farming depends upon the conditions 
.'ind circumstances of the individual farmer and farm. 

84. T'sintr 5 ner cent as the interest rate the average labor income of 
the Hyde Park farmers in 1914 was $946; using 5^4 per cent it was 
•878: using 8 per cent it was $537: using 8.6 per cent it was $455; and 
using 9 per cent it was $400. When interest is figured at 6 per cent 
labor income and the interest on investment are about equal. 

85. Labor income does not include as a receipt that part of the family 
living obtained from the farm nor the increase in the value of the land. 
When these two items are included as receipts and interest is calculated at 
8 per cent, the average labor income of these farmers is about $1300. of 



88 Bulletin h^o. 177 

whicli $600 is the opportunity value of the farmer's labor and about $700 
is pay for management which cannot be delegated and risk or responsi- 
>^^ility taken. 

86. The labor incomes of the farmers of this area are better than the 
average of the State and perhaps some better than the average of the 
United States. The business is about the same each year, and tho there 
are always a few who make very little, if anything, the profits of the 
majority are normal. 

87. The variations in labor income from year to year on an individual 
[arm result from the various causes that affect farm profits on different 
iarms, because each year, in a measure, presents an entirely new set or 
combination of conditions which the farmer has to meet, and over many 
of these he has no control whatever. 

88. The landlords who rented out their land have received on the 
average between 6 and 7 per cent net returns on their investment. With 
land increasing in value about $2.50 per acre annually, owning Hyde 
Park farm land has been profitable. 

89. Even if interest rates were considerably higher than 8 per cent, 
men would buy farm land in preference to loaning their money on farm 
)nortgages because of this increase in land value and the rent they are 
able to get from its use in farming. 

90. While the average labor income of the farmers of Utah in 1910 
was not 4uite as high as that for the average of the United States, this 
was due to a higher rate of interest being charged in Utah and is offset 
by the increase in land values. 

BEAVER, BEAVER COUNTY, UTAH 

91. Beaver is situated about 300 miles south of Hyde Park. 

92. The elevation at Beaver is 6,000 feet above mean sea level or 
1,500 feet higher than Hyde Park. 

93. Dry-farming was not practised at Beaver due to lack of sufficient 
precipitation during the growing season and to soil conditions. 

94. Alfalfa was the principal crop grown. Over 75 per cent of the 
total area in crops was in .alfalfa and other hay. The hay is grown largely 
for feed for livestock. 

95. Livestock and stock products are the principal sources of income 
from these farms. Some hay, grain, potatoes, and fruit are sold to local 
markets. 

96. The average expense for all labor other than that of the farm oper- 
ator on the ten better-paying farms was about $6 96. 

97. The better paying farms had a larger business and their livestock 
was more productive m proport'on to feed fed than the average farm. 

98. Man and horse labor were both more eflficient on the better-paying 
farms than on the average farm. 

99. The farm business at Beaver is fairly diversified. 

100. Cattle, sheep, dairying, and raising feed, in addition to raising a 
surplus of hay, grain, and potatoes as cash crops, make a fairly well bal- 
anced business. 

101. During the winter months, however, farmers' sons spend too much 
time in town playing pool, etc., instead of on the farms at productive farm 
labor. 

102. The type of farming at Beaver is more extensive, or not so in- 
tensive, as that at Hyde Park. 

103. The value of farm machinery per farm is greater at Beaver than 
at Hyde Park due to the kind of farming and the larger areas farmed by 
machinery. 

104. The value of farm buildings is less at Beaver than at Hyde Park 
due in part to warmer climate, more recent settlement, and fewer dairy 
cows. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 89 

105. The annual precipitation is about 13 inches at Beaver. All crops 
were irrigated in 1914. 

106. The soils, as at Hyde Park, are of all grades from coarse gravels 
to heavy clays depending upon nearness to the valley bottom and distance 
from the mouth of the canyon. This area is also in the Great Interior 
Soil Province. 

10 7. As at Hyde Park, there is also some bottom land needing drain- 
age and some land above the canals which, if irrigated, would be very 
productive. 

108. The Fillmore National Forest affords summer grazing for cattle 
and sheep and the Millard Desert is used for winter sheep range. These 
ranges will need to be handled more carefully in the future than in the 
past, or they will not even maintain their present carrying capacity. 

109. The population of Beaver was 1,899 in 1910. A large propor- 
tion of those who were born in the United States came from Utah and 
other Western and Middle Western States to Beaver. The foreign-born 
population is largely from Northwestern Europe and Great Britain. They 
are therefore familiar with livestock and general farming methods. 

110. The average number in the farm families on the farms at Beaver 
in 1914 was 5.4 persons. Two of these were less than 16 years old and 
3.4 were over 16 years old. These farm families are not as large as at 
Ilyde Park. 

111. The average number of men employed per farm was 1.4. That 
is equivalent to the operators' full time and 0.4 of a year of other man 
labor performed either by other members of the farm family or by hired 
help. This is two and one-half months of man labor less than was utilized 
at Hyde Park. 

112. In this area as at Hyde Park there is direct correlation between 
the size of farm family and number of cows kept for breeding and milk. 

113. Man and horse labor seems to be fairly efficient. In 1914' there 
were on the average 46 productive animal units per man and 46 crop 
acres per man. There were 16 crop acres per work horse. 

114. Beaver City is 32 ijailes from Milford, the nearest railway sta- 
tion, but the dirt road is in good condition most of the year. 

115. Milford is 206 miles west of south from Salt Lake City on the 
Salt Lake-Los Angeles Railroad. Salt Lake is about 100 miles south of 
Hyde Park. 

116. It is therefore about 300 miles east of north from Beaver to 
Hyde Park. In spite of this fact there are about 25 more days in the 
iiverage crop-growing season at Hyde Park than at Beaver. This is due 
mainly to the greater altitude, less favorable exposure, and poorer air 
drainage at Beaver. 

117. The main auto highway between Salt Lake City and Los Ang- 
eles, The Arrowhead Trail, passes thru Beaver. 

118. Due to these market conditions the greater part of the farm 
products are marketed or fed on the farm. 

119. Livestock are driven to the railroad and shipped to Los Angeles, 
Salt Lake. Ogden, Kansas City, Omaha, or Chicago. 

120. Most of the eggs and farm-made butter are sold to general mer- 
chandise stores at Beaver and are taken by them in auto trucks to Mil- 
lord for shipment to Salt Lake and elsewhere. Some eggs and butter are 
sold in the mining camps near Bjeaver. Some cream is sold in Beaver and 
! ome in the camps. The few surplus potatoes are shipped via Milford. 

121. The distance from the individual farms to the Beaver PostofTice 
varies from % to 4 miles, so that none of them are a great distance from 
the local market. 

122. There is very little tenancy in Beaver. As at Hyde Park, some 
farmers rent additional land in order to enlarge their farm business. At 
Beaver Citv more land was rented for cash than for share, but the Thir- 



90 'Bulletin No. 177 

teenth United States Census shows more share than cash tenants for 
Beaver County. 

123. The average value of land and buildings per acre at Beaver in 
1915 was $43. The value at Hyde Park was two and one-half times this 
amount. The lower price of land and the more extensive farming go ' 
together. The high value of land is a result of the greater profitableness 
of the more intensive type of farming. Farmers cannot afford to do ex- 
tensive farming on high-priced land because the greater value of the land 
is determined largely by the more profitable and more intensive type of 
farming. 

124. The facts given concerning water-tenure, water-rights, canal 
ownership and operation, duty of water, and irrigation practices at Hyde 
Park apply also to Beaver. 

125. Only 7 out of 50 farmers reported that their farms were mort- 
gaged. The interest rates paid varied from 5 to 9 per cent and averaged 
7.14 per cent. 

12G. Using 7.14 per cent as the interest rate that farm capital should 
and could earn, the average labor income of 50 Beaver farmers in 1914 
was $92. Using 5 per cent, labor income was $396. Using 9 per cent as 
the interest rate, labor income was minus $170. 

127. The labor income was greater in 1915 than in 1914 and greater 
ill 1910 than in 1915. This was due largely to the increase in the prices 
of fnrm products. 

12S. In 191G the average labor income of the farmers of this area 
was greater than the average labor income of the farmers at Hyde Park. 
This variation in labor income was undoubtedly due to the changes in 
the relative prices of farm products and the variation in the successes or 
failures of the various crop and stock enterprises in each area. 

129. The type of farming at Beaver is more extensive than at Hyde 
fark largely because of the following factors: 

(a) Climate 

(b) Soil 

(c) Markets 

(d) National Forest ranges and winter ranges 

(e) Competition of farm enterprises 

180. Range cattle and sheep are the principal sources of income 
largely because of distance to market and the low cost of livestock 
production. 

131. Alfalfa and other hay are the principal crops grown because of 
the necessity of providing winter feed for cattle and some sheep. Other 
crops grown are largely for stock feed or for the local market and are 
not important. 

MONROE, SEVIER COUNTY, UTAH 

132. Monroe is in the central part of the southwest quarter of Se- 
vier County. It is three miles from Elsinore, the nearest railway sta- 
tion. Elsinore is on the Marysvale Branch of the Denver and Rio 
Grande, or Rio Grande Western Railroad. 

133. The population of Monroe in 1910 was 1227. Those persons 
of the population who are not native born citizens, are largely from 
northwestern Europe, and are familiar with general agricultural prac- 
tices. Here, as at Hyde Park and Beaver, most of the farm families 
live in town. 

134. The elevation of Monroe is 5380 feet above mean sea level, or 
about 900 feet higher than Hyde Park. 

135. In spite of the fact that Monroe is about 300 miles south 
of Hyde Park, the average length of the growing season is only 110 days. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 91 

or 40 days less, and two weeks later than at Hyde Park. The average 
late of the last killing frost in spring is May 2 8, as compared with May 
10, at Hyde Park. The mean annual temperature is 48 degrees F. or 
0.5 degrees F. less than Beaver and about 0.4 degrees F. greater than 
lor Hyde Park. The average annual precipitation is only 8.34 inches, 
only 3.4 8 inches of which fall from April 1 to September 30. On this 
account dry-farming is not practised. All crops are irrigated. 

136. This area is in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province, and the 
soils are classified by the U. S. D. A. Bureau of Soils. The texture of 
the soils is similar to that of the other areas previously discussed. 

137. There is here, also, some low wet meadow and pasture land due 
to over irrigation and seepage water. 

13 8. The irrigation canals are owned and operated by the farmers 
who use the water. 

139. There is a sugar factory at Austin, three miles north of Mon- 
;oe. This factory makes it possible for Monroe farmers to grow sugar- 
heets. A cooperative cheese factory is situated at Monroe so that 
dairying is also developing here. 

140. One of the main auto roads of the State, running north and 
south, passes thru town. The wagon roads are in good condition the 
greater part of the year. The distance from the farms to market for 
the most important farm product varies from i/^ to 7 miles. 

141. Monroe is not handicapped to such an extent as Beaver res- 
pecting markets nor is it quite as well situated as Hyde Park. But as 
with Beaver, the main farm enterprises here are sheep and cattle, be- 
cause of the distance to any large market and the low cost of livestock 
feed. 

142. The special feature about this area is the raising of February 
iambs for the early Los Angeles market. Los Angeles buyers are on 
the ground at selling time, and usually pay fair prices for these lambs. 

14 3. Dairying and sugar-beet raising are becoming more important 
as the markets are developed. Here, as at Hyde Park, there is a direct 
•correlation between size of farm family and acres of sugar-beets grown, 
and number of cows milked. 

144. More than 61 per cent of (he land was growing hay in 1914, 
most of which was alfalfa. 

14 5. Sugar-beets and some wheat were grown as cash crops. 

14 6. Oats, rye, and barley were grown for feed. 

147. Some potatoes and sweet corn were grown for home use and to 
supply the local market. 

14 8. The Monroe farmers are "getting ahead." Their farm business 
is fairly profitable. The average labor income in 1914 was $516 with 
interest charged at 5 per cent, $363 with interest at 5.5 per cent. $196 
with interest at 8 per cent, $132 with interest at 8.6 per cent, and $89 
with interest figured at 9 per cent. In 1914, these farms were less 
nrofitable than those at Hyde Park and more profitable than those at 
Reaver. In 1915 and 1916, however, these farms were more profitable 
than those at either Hyde Park or Beaver. This variation in profitable- 
ness is undoubtedly due to the variations in the relative prices of farm 
products, especially meat and wool, as well as to the variations in the 
successes and failures of the crop and stock enterprises. The high 
prices of lambs and wool have made the war years more profitable for the 
Monroe farmers. 

SANDY, SALT LAKE COUNTY. UTAH 

149. Sandy is about 20 miles south of Salt Lake City. Draper is 

south of Sandy. The farm business records treated in this area were 

taken in the townships of Sandy. Draper. Midvale, Jordan, and West 
.Jordan. 



92 Bulletin No. 177 

150. The elevation at Sandy is 4366 feet above mean sea level, or 
lower than any of the 8 areas studied. 

151. .n 1910, Sandy had a population of 1037. There were many 
foreigners and persons with limited farm experience on the farms here. 

152. The normal annual precipitation is 16 inches, 7 of which, fall 
in the crop growing season. There are 8 9 days with .01 inch or more 
of precipitation, and the mean annual temperature is 51.4 degrees F. 
There is a greater amount of precipitation during the crop growing 
season, more stormy days, and a higher mean annual temperature in 
this area than in any of the 8 areas studied. Dry-farming is successful 
in this area where soils and topography are suitable. There are 18'-; 
days in the average growing season which is 30 days more than in 
r.ny other area included in this study. The average date of the last 
killing frost in spring is April 19, showing that the season is not only 
longer but also earlier than in any area studied. 

153. The soils of this area are typical of those of the Great Interior 
Basin Province. The soil types identified by the U. S. D. A. Bureau of 
Soils are: Jordan sanciy loam, Bingham gravelly loam, Jordan loam, 
Jordan clay and clay loam, Jordan meadows, Jordan sand, Bingham 
stony loam, and Salt Lake sand. At Sandy the soil is predominately a 
sandy loam. As in all Utah valleys, the soil is coarse near the mouth 
of the canyons at the base of the mountains, and heavy in the bottom of 
the valley. When irrigated and well drained, these soils are very fertile 
as shown by the crop yields. Some of the land is low and wet and crop 
yields are low on such fields. 

154. Here as at Hyde Park and Monroe, the number of cows milked 
Increases as the farm families increase in size. 

155. There is a great variety of crop and stock enterprises on farms 
in this district. 

156. Because of the climatic, market, soil, water, and transportation 
conditions, a wide selection of enterprises is offered these farmers. 
Each farmer has his own set of conditions and he attempts to meet 
them to his best advantage. Consequently there is a great diversity of 
practices 

157. Some farmers sell market milk to Salt Lake City, some ship 
milk to creameries, some ship to cheese factories, and a few make but- 
ter on the farms and sell it at retail. Some farmers raise hay for the 
Salt Lake City market, while others raise it to feed their own stock 
and even buy hay and grain in addition. The surplus poultry and eggs 
are sold to laborers of the smelters, to private parcel post customers in 
Salt Lake, or to a store at Sandy, Draper, or elsewhere. 

158. The farm receipts were from grain, hay, potatoes, sugar-beets, 
vegetables, fruits, straw, dairy products, cattle, horses, sheep, wool, hogs, 
poultry, eggs, honey, outside labor, and increase in inventory. Grain 
was the main source of income. On the average, there were 7.8 crops 
grown per farm, and 5.8 sources of income per farm. 

159. In 1914, with interest calculated at the rate of 5 per cent, the 
average labor income was $373; with interest at 5 1^ per cent, labor 
income was $2 94; with interest at 8 per cent, labor income was minus 
$102; with interest at 8.6 per cent, labor income was minus $196; and 
with interest at 9 per cent, labor income was minus $260. In 1915 the 
labor income was greater than in 1914 or 1916 and was in that year 
also greater than the average labor income of the farmers of Hyde 
Park. However, the farms of the group changed greatly in 1916, or 
undoubtedly that would have been the banner year of the three. It is 
no doubt true, that the increase in the value of the land was sufficient 
to make up normal profits to the landlords who are operating these 
farms. Crop yields are not as good as at Hyde Park, yet the land is 
valued higher on the average here than at Hyde Park. This is because 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 93 

of markets, climate, and to the future uses other than agriculture to 
which these lands may be put. 

FERRON, EMERY COUNTY, UTAH 

160. Ferron is in the southwest corner of the northwest quarter of 
Emery County. It is on Ferron Creek east and near the base of the 
Wasatch range of mountains. The waters of Ferron Creek flow thru 
I ne San Rafael, Green, and Colorado Rivers, and empty into the Gulf 
of California. 

161. The population of Ferron in 1910, was 651. Those farmers 
not native born were from northwestern Europe and Great Britain. 

162. The elevation at Ferron is 5500 feet above mean sea level. 

163. The normal annual precipitation is 9 inches, 5 of which fall in 
the growing season. The annual precipitation has varied from 3 to 13 
inches. There are on the average only 37 stormy days out of 365. It is 
necessary to irrigate all farm crops in this area. Ranges are poor be- 
cause of low precipitation. The mean annual temperature is 46.1 
degrees F. There are only 10 7 days in the average crop-growing sea- 
son, June 2, to September 17. 

164. Ferron is in the Rocky Mountain Valleys, Plateaus, and Plains 
Soil Province. The soil is not as good here as at Hyde Park, yet it is 
fairly fertile and under favorable conditions produces good crops as 
shown by the crop yields. 

165. While climate and soil handicap this area some, yet the great- 
est handicap is the marketing situation. Ferron is 45 miles from Price, 
the railroad town where some of the farm and range products from 
this district are marketed or loaded for shipment to market. 

Mining camps, 40 to 60 miles from Ferron also offer an outlet for 
some farm products. Some apples, plums, and small bush-fruits; vege- 
tables; and melons are marketed at Sunnyside, Hiawatha, Scofield, and 
other mining camps. Peddlers gather these products and butter and 
meats from farmers and sell them in the camps. In a few instances 
the peddlers are the farmers themselves. Some grain and baled hay 
are also sold in the camps. The principal source of income is range 
cattle. Stock can be driven to the railroad and shipped out to the great 
central markets. 

166. Some cattle are grazed on the Manti National Forest, but 
most of them are grazed on the prairies or plateaus south, east, and 
west of Ferron. Because of the severe winter weather and the lack of 
winter grazing, these range cattle are fed on the farms in winter. 
Raising their feed is an important part of the farming operations in sum- 
mer. Some farmers let the cattle stay out so late in the fall that severe 
storms often cause great losses from cold and starvation. 

167. A few farmers have been successful in keeping bees. One farmer 
has done especially well the past few years with his bee business. 

168. Sugar-beets are not grown to any extent here because there is no 
factory at which to market the beets. 

169. Dairying is also limited because of lack of markets. 

170. Not much care is given fruit trees because of the uncertainty of 
the market and the weather. Two orchadists asked the writer's advice 
about taking out their trees and planting alfalfa. The narrow market is 
a great handicap to fruit growing. 

171. Yet with all of these handicaps the lower valuation of land and 
smaller capital requirements make it possible for these farmers to make 
fair labor incomes. In 1914 using an interest rate of 5 per cent, the 
average labor income of the Ferron farmers was $326; using a 5.5 per 
cent interest rate, it was $291; using an 8 per cent interest rate, it was 
$117; using an 8.6 per cent interest rate, it was $75; and using 9 per cent 



94 Bulletin No. 177 

as the interest rate it was $47. In 1915 the average labor income was 
about the same as in 1914, but in 1916 it was much greater than in either 
of the other two years. 

WELLINGTON, CARBON COUNTY, UTAH 

172. Wellington is situated west and south of the central part of 
Carbon County. It is about 12 miles southeast of Price on the Denver and 
Rio Grande Railroad. 

17 3. In 1910 the population of Wellington was 35 8. Here, as else- 
where in Utah, most of the farmers live in town and their farming lands 
are from 1 to 5 or 7 miles away, surrounding the town. 

174. The elevation is 5540 feet above mean sea level. 

175. The normal annual precipitation is only 7 inches, of which but 
4 inches fall from April 1 to September 30. 

176. The climate, soil, topography, camp markets, and type of farm- 
ing are very similar to those at Ferron, Emery County. Proportion- 
ately more livestock, however, are raised at Wellington than at Ferron. 
There are also more sheep in proportion to cattle here than at Ferron 
due largely to the range conditions. Alfalfa is the principal crop. 

177. Records were taken here one year only, 1914, and then but 
2 6 business statements were obtained as this is a small and limited area. 

17 8. The average labor income of the 26 Wellington farmers in 

1914 was $165 when interest was charged at 8 per cent, the average 
mortgage rate for the state. The average capital investment was $8391 
so that 8 per cent interest amounts to $671. Undoubtedly the years 

1915 and 1916, were considerably more profitable than 1914 because 
of the increased livestock prices. 

HINCKLEY, MILLARD COUNTY, UTAH 

179. Hinckley is situated in about the center of the northeast 
quarter of Millard County. It is about 6 miles north and west of 
Oasis, which is the nearest railway station. 

180. In 1910 the population of Hinckley was 553. The majority of 
the persons are native-born citizens of the United States. There were 
a few persons from Sweden, Denmark and Great Britain. 

181. The elevation at Hinckley is about 4541 feet above mean sea 
level. 

182. The normal annual precipitation is about 8 inches, only 4 
inches of which fall during the growing season. Because of this light 
rainfall, dry-farming is not practised. All farm crops are irrigated. 

183. The Nebo National Forest to the east of Hinckley is too far 
away to be of any value to the farmers of this area, so the range land 
is very limited and what range there is is not of excellent quality. 

184. This area is in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province. The 
soil is not as fertile as that at Hyde Park and because of poor natural 
drainage, is inclined to be alkaline. Clay and clay loam predominate 
although there is some sandy loam reported. The land in general is 
Tat; often it is too flat to irrigate conveniently. 

185. Alfalfa is by far the most important crop grown. Other crops 
grown are: other hay, spring wheat, winter wheat, oats, rye, corn, and 
garden products. 

186. Dairying is practised on some farms in a limited way, but has 
not yet developed to any sizable proportions nor is it likely to do so 
in the near future. 

187. The main sources of income in 1914 were: (1) alfalfa seed, 
(2) alfalfa hay and other hay, and (3) cattle. The growing of alfalfa 
seed on most farms of this area is quite a gamble. But on a few farms 
a fairly good crop is obtained each year. When a crop of seed is 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 95 

obtained, the farmer makes a verj- good labor income, but when the crop 
is left for seed and the seed fails, the dry stalks are not of great value 
and labor income in such cases is often a minus quantity. 

188. In brief, Hiifckley about feeds itself, but its clothes, household 
goods, and other necessaries it buys outside and pays for them with 
alfalfa seed, hay, cattle, farm butter, surplus eggs, farm-dressed pork, 
a few horses, and personal services. 

189. The type of farming followed is fairly well adapted to condi- 
tions and on the average is also fairly profitable. In 1914, using 5 per 
cent interest the average labor income of the Hinckley farmers was 
$613; using 5.5 per cent interest, $5 65; using 8 per cent $323; using 
8.6 per cent, $266; and using 9 per cent, labor income was $228. In 
1915 the average labor income was less than in 1914, due largely to 
the fact that the alfalfa seed crop was not quite as good. In 1916 the 
labor income on the average was about the same as in 1914. The seed 
crop was not quite so good but prices were higher. 

PLEASANT GROVE, UTAH COUNTY, UTAH 

190. Pleasant Grove is situated just south of east of the north end 
of Utah Lake in Utah County. 

191. The 1910 U. S. Census gave the population of Pleasant Grove 
as 1618. The farmers live in town while their farms are on the out- 
skirts and in the outlying area. The people here are native born, or 
are from northwestern Europe or Great Britain. 

192. The elevation is 4532 feet above mean sea level. 

193. The normal annual precipitation is 15 inches, 6 of which fall 
in the growing season. Dry-farming is successfully practised here. 
The absolute lowest annual precipitation recorded is 9 inches and the 
absolute highest annual precipitation recorded is 22 inches. There are 
on the average, 66 days annually with .01 inch or more precipitation. 
The mean annual temperature is 49.7 degrees F. This is higher than 
for Hyde Park but lower than for Sandy. The warmest temperature 
recorded for any of the 8 areas is 105 degrees F. and that was recorded 
in the Pleasant Grove area. The average crop growing season has 145 
days, or a few less than Hyde Park, and 35 to 40 less than Sandy, 
although situated further south than either of these areas. The average 
date of last killing frost in spring is May 12, or about the same as for 
Hyde Park, but a little earlier than Beaver, and much later than Sandy. 
The absolute latest date of killing frost is June 2 9, or about the same 
as at Hyde Park and Monroe. 

194. This area is situated in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province. 
A detailed soil survey has been made of this area and the following soil 
types distinguished: Maricopa stony loam, Maricopa gravelly loam, Jor- 
dan clay, Fresno sand, Jordan loam, Jordan sandy loam. Salt Lake loam, 
and the gravel areas. These same soils are among those identified in 
the Sandy area. The best sugar-beet soil is the Jordan sandy loam, and 
the Jordan loam is the second best soil for this crop. 

195. Creeks from the mountain canyons on the east of Pleasant 
Grove and flowing wells furnish the irrigation water for the farms. The 
irrigation systems are owned and operated by the farmers themselves. 

196. Transportation by rail and auto roads is easy and adequate. 
Sugar-beets are shipped to the Lehi factory from this area. 

197. The Wasatch National Forest east of town offers good grazing 
for stock for about 8 months of the year. More cattle than sheep were 
kept on this range because of adaptability and profitableness during 
tnese years. 

198. The principal sources of income in 1916 in the order of im- 
portance were: sugar-beets, cattle sales, outside labor, grain, potatoes, 
fruit, increase in feed and supply inventory, swine "sales, poultry and 



96 Bulleti7i No. 177 

eggs, increase in livestock inventory, hay, horse sales, increase in ma- 
^;hinery inventory, other crop sales, increase in inventory of land and 
buildings, and sheep sales. 

19 9. The average labor income of these farmers in 1916, using 5 
per cent interest was $651; using 5.5 per cent interest, $612; usin^ 

8 per cent interest, $418; using 8.6 per cent interest, $370; and using 

9 per cent interest, the labor income was $340. There is no doubt but 
that the years 1915 and 1914 would have shown a smaller labor income 
than 1916, because the farm prices were not as high then as in 1916. 

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 

200. It has been shown in this thesis that there are a multitude 
of factors that affect type of farming in Utah. Some, of these factors 
are: (1) Location of the area, (2) elevation, (3) crops, (4) crop dis- 
eases, (5) livestock, (6) crop and stock combinations, (7) pasture, (8) 
the returns from crops and stock, (9) diversity and balance of farm 
business, (10) size of farm business, (11) farm machinery, (12) build- 
ings, (13) climate, (14) topography, (15) soil, (16) National Forests 
and public stock ranges, (17) population, (18) the farm family, (19) 
farm labor, (20) markets, (21) wagon and auto roads and railroads, 
f22) land-tenure, (23) land values, (24) water-tenure, (25) water- 
rights, (26) canal ownership and operation, (27) duty of water, (28) 
irrigation practice, (29) amount of irrigation water necessary, (30) 
amount of water to use and time of application, (31) farm credit, (32) 
farm mortgages, (33) other security, (34) interest rates, (35) farm 
profits, (36) labor incomes, (37) rents, and (38) what the farm 
furnishes towards the living of the farm family. 

In any specific area, however, or on any particular farm, the type of 
farming is determined by the combinations and inter-relations of all 
these natural and economic factors. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

It is a pleasure to acknowledge the assistance of Dr. John D. Black, 
Chief of the Division of Agricultural Economics, Dr. George W. Dowrie, 
Professor of Economics and Dean of the School of Business, and Prof. 
Andrew Boss, Chief of the Division of Agronomy and Farm Management 
and Vice-director of the Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station — 
all of the University of Minnesota — in criticising these data and their 
preparation, and for suggesting sources of information upon the subject 
investigated. Prof. George Stewart of the Agronomy Department of the 
Utah Agricultural College also read the manuscript and gave some help- 
ful criticisms. Mr. C. G. Worsham made the drawings. 

The writer appreciates the cooperation of the Utah State Leader of 
County Agents and the County Agents of the respective areas included 
in the investigation for their assistance in taking the farm business 
records; and he also wishes to thank the many farmers who so gener- 
ously gave the information concerning their farm business. 

Without financial assistance from the Utah Agricultural Experiment 
Station, the Utah Agricultural Extension Division, and the United States 
Department of Agriculture it would have been impossible for the writer 
to have had calculated and put in usable form all of these farm business 
data. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



97 



APPENDIX 

Table I. — Business Factors of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache 
County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 

Average of 10 Average of 

better-paying all 52 

farms farms 

Diversity of Farming 

dumber of crops grown 5.1 4.6 

Number sources income over 8 per cent 

gross receipts 4 3 

Sources of income over 8 per cent gross 
receipts: 

Sugar-beets $ 1,075 $ 705 

Creamery milk 597 400 

Grain.- 891 302 

Cattle 356 — 

Size of Farm Business 

Capital $19,816 $13,642 

Receipts in farm 4.133 2,510 

Acres in farm 226 105 

Crop acres , 105 54 

Acres sugar-beets 12.8 8.5 

Milk Cows 10.1 7.5 

Work horses 5.6 4.0 

Productive animal units (P.A.U.) 23.7 14.8 

Alan labor equivalent (year basis) 2.0 1.6 

Productivity of Crops 

Crop receipts per crop acre $ 21 $ 22 

Crop yields per acre: 

Potatoes 205 bu. 178 bu. 

Wheat (spring and winter) 24 bu. 26 bu. 

Oats 71 bu. 70 bu. 

Barley (both dry-farm and irrigated).... 23 bu. '28 bu. 

Alfalfa 3.6 tons 4 tons 

Other hay 2.4 tons 2.6 tons 

Sugar-beets 1S.6 tons 18.6 tons 

Productivity of Livestock 

Xet livestock receipts per $100 feed fed....$ 120 $ 107 

Net livestock receipts per P. A. U 60 60 

Cattle receipts per head 22 22 

Milk receipts per cow 62 56 

Man Labor Efficiency 

j'roductive animal units per man 12 9 

Crop acres per man 52 33 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 19 14 

Labor Income $ 1.997 $ 946 



98 



Bulletin No. 1 77 



Table II.- 



-Business Factors of Farms of the Hyde Park Area, Cache 
County, 1915, Showing Types of Farming 



Average of Average of Average of 

10 better- 10 least profit- all 48 ' 

paying farms able farms farms 

Diversity of Farming 

Percentage of total farm receipts 

from stock 38 27 35 

Size of Farm Business 

Totg,! farm capital $14,358 $12,688 $11,987 

Total working capital 2,962 2,458 2,559 

Total farm receipts 3,041 1,386 1,987 

Total farm expenses 877 845 799 

Total crop receipts 1,569 958 1,050 

Net livestock receipts 1,174 387 724 

Total receipts from dairy products.. 470 312 414 

Value of feed fed to livestock 881 744 750 

Total acres in farm 167 106 107 

Total crop acres.... 63 51 52 

Total productive animal units 

(P. A. U.) 20 16 16 

Total work horses 4 4 4 

Total men (1 year basis) 1.5 1.6 1.6 

Productivity of Crops (See tables 4 and 5 in text) 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per $100 

feed fed $ 133 $ 52 $ 97 

Net livestock receipts per P.A.U 57 24 25 

Receipts per cow dairy products 70 38 54 

Man Labor Efficiency 

Productive animal units per man.... 14 10 10 

Crop acres per man 42 31 33 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 15 14 14 

Labor Income $ 1,446 % -93 $ 589 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 99 

Table III. — Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the 

Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type 

of Farming 

No. Value 

^'arm Capital 

Total acres in farm 167 $11,407 

MilK cows 7 434 

Otuer cattle 114 3,836 

Horses and colts 10 715 

Sheep 394 2,550 

Hogs 10 81 

Poultry and bees 54 38 

Machinery 740 

Feed and supplies 666 

Cash 170 

Total Farm Capital - : $20,637 

Farm Receipts 
Crops: 

Potatoes $ 61 

Grain 171 

Hay 358 

Fruit and vegetables 20 

Livestock 

Dairy products 211 

Cattle 1,202 

Horse? 148 

Sheep and wool 1,183 

Hogs 71 

Poultry and eggs...! 60 

Miscellaneous receipts 254 

Increase in feed and supplies 202 

Total Farm Receipts $ 3,941 

Farm E.vpenses 

Hired Labor $ 600 

Machinery repairs and depreciation 74 

Buildding and fence repairs and depreciation Ii9 

Feed 47 

Horseshoeing 10 

Breeding fees and seeds 18 

Threshing and twine (excludes toll) 17 

Machine work hired 31 

Taxes 284 

Water tax 25 

Cash rent and forest reserve fees 18 

Miscellaneous expenses 21 

Value of family labor 96 



Total Farm Expenses % 1,360 

Farm Income (Receipts minus expenses) 2,581 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 per cent) 1,651 

Labor Income 930 



100 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table IV. — Business Factors of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver 
County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 

better-paying all 50 ,^ 

farms farms 

Diversity of Farming 

Number of sources of income 6.1 5.4 

Number of crops grown 7.0 6.4 

Number of sources income over 10 per cent 

gross receipts 2 2 

Sources of income over 10 per cent gross 
receipts: 

Cattle $ 1,202 $ 627 

Sheep 1,183 301 

Size of Farm Business 

Total capital $20,637 $14,158 

Total acres -... 167 179 

Crop acres ; 105 69 

Acres alfalfa and other hay 89 51 

Hogs 10 6 

Men . 1.8 1.4 

Other cattle 114 47 

Productive animal units 150 66 

Productivity of Crops 

Crop receipts per crop acre $ 6 $ 5 

Crop yields per acre: 

Potatoes 132 bu. 115 bu. 

Spring wheat 23 bu. 23 bu. 

Oats 43 bu. 40 bu. 

Alfalfa 2.2 tons 2.4 tons 

Other hay 1.7 tons 1.9 tons 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed....$ 229 $ 153 

Net livestock receipts per P. A. U.(i) 19 20 

Cattle receipts per head (2) 11 13 

Milk receipts per cow 32 17 

Man Labor Efficiency 

Miscellaneous receipts per man $ 139 $ 157 

Productive animal units per man 82 46 

Crop acres per man 58 46 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse '..... 22 16 

Labor Income $ 930 $ -29 

(i)"A. U." represents "Animal Units", "P. A. U." represents "Pro- 
ductive Animal Units". Work Horses are not counted here as Productive 
/<nimal Units. 

(2) Does not include milk cows. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 101 

Table V. — Business Statement of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver 
County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 

Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 

better-paying least-profitable of all 

farms farms 40 farms 

» 

Farm Capital 

Real estate $ 8,315 $10,050 $ 8,174 

livestock - 5,056 4.667 3,402 

Machinery and tools : 873 479 555 

Feed and seeds 498 542 464 

Cash 75 10 32 

T^otal Farm Capital $14,817 $15,748 $12,627 

Farm Receipts 

Crops - $ 324 $ 349 $ 319 

Livestock.. 2,790 758 1.255 

Miscellaneous receipts 441 102 228 

Increase in feed and seed inventory 364 34 189 

Total Farm Receipts $ 3,919 $ 1,243 $ 1,988 

Farm Expenses 

Current farm expenses $ 1,013 $ 686 $ 665 

Depreciation in mach., bldgs., fences 185 172 140 

Decrease in inventory of feed and seed... 

Total Farm Expenses -$ 1,198 $ 858 $ 805 

Farm Income (Receipts-expenses) 2.721 385 1,183 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 

per cent) 1,183 1,260 1.010 

Labor Income $ 1.538 $ -875 $ 173 



102 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table VI. — Business Factors of Farms of the Beaver Area, Beaver 
County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 

better-paying least-profitable of alU 

farms farms 40 farms 

m 

Diversity of Farming 

Percentage of total farm receipts 

from stock ...- - 71 57 62 

Size of Farm Business 

Fixed Farm Capital (Real Estate) ...% 8,315 $10,050 $ 8,174 

Working Capital 6,502 5,699 4,471 

Farm receipts 3,919 1,243 1,988 

Farm expenses 1,198 858 805 

Net livestock receipts 2,790 758 1,255 

Receipts from dairy products 279 112 209 

Acres in farm 138 158 190 

Crop acres 65 73 62 

Productive animal units (P. A. U.) 83 73 54 

Work horses 4 5 4 

Men (1 year basis) 2 1.5 1.6 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per $100 feed 

fed --: $ 265 $ 72 $ 138 

Net livestock receipts per P. A. U 34 10 24 

Receipts per cow dairy products 47 17 30 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 18 15 16 

Labor Income $ 1,538 $ -875 $ 173 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



103 



Table VII. — Business Statement of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver 
County, Utah. 1916, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 44 
farms farms farms 



Farm Capital 

Real estate 

Land -..$ 9,2 61 

Buildings 1,720 

Livestock 6,332 

Machinery 866 

Feed and supplies. 698 

Total Farm Capital , $18,877 

Farm Receipts 

Crops 

Potatoes $ 60 

Grain 86 

Hay - 130 

Other crops 10 

Livestock 

Dairy products 348 

Poultry and egg sales 52 

Cattle sales .:. 634 

Horse sales 52 

Sheep sales '. 2,032 

Swine sales 193 

Other receipts 545 

Increase livestock inventory 1,744 

Increase machinery inventory 24 

Increase feed and supplies 392 

Total Farm Receipts % 6,302 

Farm Expenses 

Blacksmith and machine work % 53 

Hired labor 494 

Machinery, building and fence material.. 104 

Feeds and seeds 196 

Fees, rents, and taxes 280 

Other expenses 59 

LivestocK purchased 823 

Decrease in feed and supplies — 

Decrease in land and buildings 31 

Value of family labor 215 

Total Farm Expenses $ 2,255 

Farm income (Receipts-expenses) $ 4,047 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 

per cent) 1,510 

Labor Income $ 2,537 



% 8,660 


$ 7,078 


1,955 


1,696 


2,385 


3,057 


443 


504 


679 


580 



$14,122 



$ 1,792 



$12,915 



$ 47 


$ 77 


171 


155 


239 


193 


19 


7 


254 


260 


20 


44 


277 


292 


143 


83 





467 


101 


122 


296 


334 


127 


729 


98 


26 


— 


159 



$ 2,948 



$ 


43 


$ 


51 




145 




185 




152 




72 




30 




67 




189 




200 




15 




25 




494 




473 




108 




— 




39 




33 




60 


$ 


98 


$ 


1,275 


1,204 


$ 


517 


$ 


1.744 




1,130 




1,033 


$ 


-613 




711 



104 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table VIII. — Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the 

Monroe Area, Sevier County, Utah, 1914, Showing 

Type of Farming 



No. 



Value 



Fami Capital 

Total acres in farm 104 

Milk cows 10 

Other cattle 24 

Horses and colts 9 

Sheep 334 

Hogs - 9 

Poultry and bees 73 

Machinery 

Feed and supplies - 

Cash 

Total Farm Capital 

Farm Receipts 
Crops 

Potatoes 

Grain 

Hay 

Sugar-beets 

Fruits and vegetables 

Livestock 

Dairy products 

Cattle 

Horses : 

Sheep and wool 

Hogs 

Poultry and eggs 

Miscellaneous receipts 

Increase in feed and supplies 

Total Farm Receipts 

Farm Expenses 

Hired labor ■. 

Machinery repairs and depreciation 

Building and fence repairs and depreciation 

Feed 

Horseshoeing 

Breeding fees and seeds 

Threshing and twine (excludes toll) 

Machine work hired 

laxes 

Water tax 

Cash rent and forest reserve fees 

Miscellaneous expenses 

Value of family labor 

Total Farm Expenses 

Farm Income (Receipts-expenses) 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 per cent) 

Labor Income 



$11,474 

594 

923 

1,106 

1,480 

82 

58 

636 

633 

400 

$17,386 



$ 116 

80 

229 

464 

24 

274 

731 

145 

1,992 

66 
164 
350 

97 

$ 4,732 

$ 588 
43 

126 

425 
19 
23 
15 
13 

221 
78 

277 
93 

154 

$ 2,075 

$ 2,657 
1,391 

$ 1,266 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



105 



Table IX. — Business Factors of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier 
County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 

better-paying 

farms 

Diversity of Farming 

Number of sources of income 6.9 

Number of crops grown 4.8 

Number sources income over 10 per cent 

gross receipts 2 

Sources of income over 10 per cent gross 
receipts: 

Sheep $ 1,992 

Cattle . 731 

Size of Farm Business 
Farm capital ? $17,386 

Farm area (acres) .■... 104 

Crop acres 74 

Acres alfalfa 50 

-Number of sheep 334 

Number of milk cows 10 

Number of other cattle 24 

Number of animal units{i) 73 

Number of productive animal units(2) 68 

Productivity of Crops 

Crop receipts per crop acre $ 12 

Crop yields per acre: 

Potatoes 218 bu. 

Spring wheat 33 bu. 

Oats 49 bu. 

Alfalfa 3.8 tons 

Other hay 4 tons 

Sugar-beets 11 tons 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed.-.$ 179 

Net livestock receipts per animal unit 46 

Cattle receipts per head(3) 30 

Milk receipts per cow 27 

Mau Labor Efficiency 

Miscellaneous receipts per man $ 160 

Animal units per man 33 

Productive animal units per man(3) 31 

Crop acres per man 34 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 14 

Labor Inconio $ 1,266 

(1) Includes work horses. 
(-)Does not include work horses. 
(3) Does not include milk cows. 



Average of 
all 6 3 
farms 



6.2 
4.8 



453 
271 



$ 

$10,668 

59 
44 
25 
107 
6 
10 
32 
28 

$ 13 



157 


bu. 


31 


bu. 


49 


bu. 


4 


tons 


3 


tons 


11 


tons 



125 

34 
26 

28 

129 

20 
18 
28 

11 

196 



106 Bulletin No. 177 



Table X. — Business Statement of Farms of the Monroe Area, Sevier 
County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 38 
farms farms farms 



Farm Capital 

Real estate $ 9,780 % 6,675 % 7,246 

Livestock - 6,315 1,084 2,607 

Machinery 572 472 469 

Feed and seeds 517 180 325 

Cash 392 51 141 



Total Farm Capital ' $17,576 $ 8,462 $10,788 

Farm Receipts 

Crops $ 614 $ 446 $ 546 

Livestock and livestock products 4,672 484 1,653 

Miscellaneous 256 130 192 

Increase in feed and seed inventory 120 32 100 

Total Farm Receipts $ 5,662 $ 1,092 $ 2,491 

Farm Expenses 

Current farm expenses..... .$ 2,008 $ 597 $ 940 

Dep. of machinery, buildings and fences.. 102 110 98 

Total Farm Expenses $ 2,110 $ 707 $ 1,038 

Farm Income (receipts-expenses) $ 3,552 $ 385 $ 1,453 

Interest on Total Farm Capital at 8 per 

cent ^ 1,406 677 863 

Labor Income 2,146 $ -292 590 



So7}ie Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



107 



Table XI. — Business Factors of Farms of the Monroe Area, Sevier 
County, Utah, 1915, Showing Tj-pe of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 38 
farms farms farms 



Diversity of Fanning 

Percentage of total farm receipts 

from stock 82 46 66 

Productive animal units per 100 

acres crops 234 46 106 

Crop acres per productive animal 

unit 0.43 2.2 0.9 

Size of Farm Business 

Farm capital $17,576 $ 8,462 $10,788 

Working capital 7,796 1,787 3,542 

Farm receipts 5,662 1,092 2,491 

Farm expenses 2,110 707 1,038 

Crop receipts 614 446 546 

Net livestock receipts. 4,672 484 1,653 

Receipts from dairy products 235 123 188 

Value of feed fed to livestock 1,846 615 928 

Acres in farm 76 45 54 

Crop acres 56 39 44 

Productive animal units (P.A.U.).. 131 18 47 

Work horses 5 3 4 

Men ( 1 year basis) 2.1 1.3 1.6 

Productivity of Crops 

Crop indedx(i) 110 85 100 

Crop yields per acre: 

Potatoes ' 149 bu. 

Spring wheat 36 bu. 

Oats 52 bu. 

Barley 62 bu. 

Alfalfa 3.3 tons 

Other hay 4.8 tons 

Sugar-beets 10.2 tons 

Productivity of Livestock 

Xet livestock receipts per $100 

feed fed $ 253 $ 79 $ 178 

Net livestock receipts per P.A.U. 36 27 36 

Man Labor Efficiency 

Productive animal units per man 61 14 26 

Labor Income $ 2.146 $ -292 $ 590 

n )Crop index shows the yields per acre compared to the average yields 
of the area when each crop is given its proper proportion by weighting 
by acreages harvested. 



108 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XII. ^ — Business Statement- of Farms of the Monroe Area, Sevier 
County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming 

Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 57 

farms farms farms 

Farm Capital 

Real estate: 

Land % 9,005 $ 2,748 $ 5,303 

Buildings 1,790 1,088 1,416 

Livestoclt 6,749 697 2,552 

Machinery 569 281 450 

Feed and supplies 514 198 430 

Total Farm Capital $18,627 $ 5,012 $10,151 

Farm Receipts 
Crops: 

Potatoes $ 40 $ 14 $ 32 

Grain 262 76 204 

Hay 783 12 200 

Sugar-beets 555 102 387 

Fruit — — 3 

Other crops — 31 7 

Livestock: 

Dairy products 196 97 183 

Poultry and egg sales 51 25 57 

Cattle sales- 1,213 177 543 

Horse sales 28 14 57 

Sheep sales 2,501 22 613 

Swine sales 311 49 115 

Other receipts 1,100 103 380 

Increase in livestock inventory 1,222 — 433 

Increase in machinery inventory 33 — 8 

Increase in feed and supplies 621 71 418 

increase in land and buildings 30 — — 

Total Farm Receipts.... $ 8,946 $ 793 $ 3,640 

Farm Expenses 

Blacksmith and machine work $ 135 $ 25 $ 86 

Hired labor 782 17 259 

Machinery, building, and fence material.. 207 25 115 

Feed and seeds 341 39 139 

Fees, rents and taxes 517 82 246 

Other expenses 256 5 56 

LivestocK purchased 2,248 83 746 

Decrease in livestock inventory — 38 — 

Decrease in machinery inventory — 18 — 

Decrease in land and buildings — 40 2 

Value of family labor 110 66 131 

Total Farm Expenses $ 4,596 $ 438 $ 1,780 

li'arm Income ^( Receipts-expenses) $ 4,350 $ 355 $ 1,860 

Interest on Total Farm Capital at 8 

per cent 1,490 401 812 

Labor Income $ 2,860 $ -46 1,048 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



109 



Table XIII. — Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the 

Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914, Showing 

Type of Farming 



No. 



Value 



Farm Capital 

Total acres in farm 130 

Milk cows 9 

Other cattle 13 

Horses and colts 9 

Sheep 7 

Hogs 12 

Poultry 72 

Machinery 

Feed and supplies 

Cash 

Total Farm Capital 

Farm Receipts 
Crops 

Potatoes 

. Grain 

Hay 

Straw 

Sugar-beets 

Fruit and vegetables 

Livestock 

Dairy products 

Cattle 

Horses 

Sheep and wool 

Hogs : 

Poultry and eggs 

Miscellaneous receipts 

Increase in feed and supplies 

Total Farm Receipts 

Farm Expenses 

Hired labor 

Machinery repairs and depreciation 

Building and fence repairs and depreciation 

Feed 

Horseshoeing and veterinary fees 

Breeding fees and seeds 

Threshing and twine (excludes toll) 

Machine work hired 

Taxes 

Water tax 

Cash rent and forest reserve fees 

Miscellaneous expenses '. 

Value of family labor 

Total Farm Expenses 

Farm Income (receipts minus expenses) 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 per cent) 

Labor Income 



$22,788 

691 

524 

1,013 

27 

116 

45 

1,027 

576 

95 

126,902 



$ 128 
704 
536 
32 
295 
127 

1,035 
407 
108 

19 
211 

71 
712 
282 

I 4,667 

$ 791 
44 
43 

110 
30 
76 
45 
48 

123 
71 
77 
97 

368 

I 1,923 



2.744 
2,152 

592 



110 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XIV. — Business Factors of Farms of Sandy Area, Salt Lake 
County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 bet- 
ter-paying farms 



Average of all 
72 farms 



301 

272 



$15,828 

100 

55 

3 

1.7 

4.4 

4.1 

15.3 



Diversity of Farming 

Number of sources of income 6.5 

Number of crops grown 6.9 

Number sources income over 10 per cent gross 

receipts 2 

Sources of income over 10 per cent gross 
receipts: 

Grain - % 704 

Sheep, hogs, poultry, and bees.. — 

Milk and butter. 1,035 

Size of Farm Business 

Capital ..- - ; ..$2 6,902 

Acres in farm 130 

Crop acres 104 

Acres sugar-beets 4 

Number of men 2.6 

Number of milk cows 8.8 

Number of work horses 6.6 

Productive animal units.. 22.4 

Productivity of Crops 

Crop receipts per crop acre $ 18 

Crop yields per acre: 

Potatoes 135 

Wheat 21 

Oats 51 

Barley 4 8 

Alfalfa 3.7 

Other hay 3.1 

Sugar-beets 15.4 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per SlOO feed fed ...$ 148 

Net livestock receipts per P. A. U 86 

Cattle receipts per head 32 

Milk receipts per cow 117 

Man Labor Efficiency 

Productive animal units per man 9 

Crop acres per man 40 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 16 

Labor Income $ 592 



17 



bu. 


113 bu. 


bu. 


27 bu. 


bu. 


41 bu. 


bu. 


46 bu. 


tons 


3.4 tons 


tons 


2.8 tons 


tons 


12.1 tons 


$ 


94 




48 




25 




53 




9 




32 




13 


$ 


-102 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 111 

Table XV. — Business Statement of Farms of Sandy Area, Salt Lake 
County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 

better-paying least-profitable of all 47 

farms farms farms 

Farm Capital 

Real estate $11,412 $12,508 $10,981 

Livestock 2,423 1,193 1,372 

Machinery and tools 614 412 465 

Feeds and seeds 392 294 362 

Cash 40 31 40 

Total Farm Capital $14,881 $14,438 $13,220 

Farm Receipts 

Crops $ 1,987 $ 674 $ 1,110 

Livestock 1,764 457 678 

Miscellaneous receipts 565 119 371 

Increase in feed and seed inventory 240 38 14 

Total Farm Receipts $ 4,556 $ 1,288 $ 2,173 

Farm Expenses 

Current farm expenses $ 1,171 % 964 $ 813 

Depreciation in Mach., bldgs., fences 9 7 86 81 

Decrease in inventory of feeds and seeds.. 

Total Farm Expenses $ 1,268 $ 1,050 $ 894 

Farm Income (receipts-expenses) $ 3,288 $ 238 $ 1,279 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 

per cent) 1.190 1,155 1,058 

Labor Income $ 2,098 $ -917 $ 221 



112 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XVI. — Business Factors of Farms of the Sandy Area, Salt 
Lake County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 47 
farms farms farms 



Diversity of Business 

Productive animal units per 100 acres 

crops 60 

Size of Farm Business 

Total farm capital $14,881 

Working capital 3,469 

Farm receipts 4,556 

Farm expenses 1,268 

Crop receipts 1,987 

Value of feed fed to livestock 827 

Net livestock receipts :. 1,764 

Total acres in farm 601 

Crop acres 63 

Productive animal units (P.A.U.) 38 

Men (1 year basis) 2.1 

Productivity of Crops 

Crop index (percentage) 114 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed$ 213 

Net livestock receipts per P. A. U 47 

Man Labor Efficiency 

Productive animal units per man 18 

Crop acres per man 30 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 13 

Labor Income $ 2,089 



30 



40 



$14,438 


$13,220 


1,931 


2,191 


1,288 


2,173 


1,050 


894 


674 


1,110 


757 


733 


457 


678 


128 


201 


49 


47 


13 


16 


, 2 


1.7 



100 



60 
36 


$ 92 
41 


6 

25 


10 

27 


10 


12 


17 


$ 221 



.$ 8,930 


$ 4,985 


1,266 


1,147 


789 


828 


352 


264 


304 


228 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 113 

Table XVII. — Business Statement of Farms of Sandy Area, Salt 
Lake County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming 

Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 45 
farms farms farms 

Farm Capital 

Real estate: 

Land $ 5,047 

Buildings 1,475 

Livestock 1,202 

Machinery 342 

Feed and supplies 350 

Total Farm Capital $ 8,416 $11,641 $ 7,452 

Farm Receipts 

Crops 

Potatoes $ 64 

Grain 25 

Hay 24 

Sugar-beets 108 

Fruit 103 

Other crops 88 

Livestock 

Dairy products 409 

Poultry and egg sales 147 

Cattle sales 1,340 

Horse sales 81 

Sheep sales 1 

Swine sales 311 

Other receipts 602 

Increase in livestock inventory 266 

Increase in feed and supplies 332 

Total Farm Receipts $ 3,901 $ 1,020 $ 1,726 

Farm Expenses 
Blacksmith and machine work $ 45 



$ 84 


$ 48 


153 


56 


32 


24 


48 


102 


15 


44 


46 


70 


94 


155 


37 


72 


51 


397 


35 


64 


11 


3 


67 


115 


192 


351 


38 


74 


117 


151 



Hired labor 



152 



Mach., bldg., and fence material 20 

Feed and seeds - HI 

Fees, rents, and taxes 146 

Other expenses 22 

Livestock purchased 1,367 

Decrease in machinery inventory 19 

Decrease in land and buildings 29 

Value of family labor 105 

Total Farm Expenses ? 2,016 

Farm income (Receipts-expenses) $ 1,885 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 

per cent) 673 

Labor Income f 1,212 



$ 


51 


$ 


38 




196 




98 




15 




21 




19 




58 




172 




133 




14 




15 




113 




377 




15 




5 




25 




23 




99 




71 


$ 


719 


% 


839 


$ 


301 


$ 


887 




931 




596 


1 


-630 


$ 


291 



114 



Bulletin, No. 177 



Table XVIII. — Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the 
Ferron Area, Emery County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 



No. 



Value 



Farm Capital 

Total acres in farm 139 

Milk cows 7 

Other cattle 20 

Horses and colts 6 

Sheep 3 

Hogs - 12 

Poultry and bees 112 

Machinery 

Feed and supplies 

Cash 

Total Farm Capital 

Farm receipts 

Crops 

Potatoes 

Grain 

Hay 

Seeds 

Fruit and vegetables 

Livestock 

Dairy products 

Cattle 

Horses 

Sheep and wool 

Hogs 

Poultry and eggs 

Miscellaneous receipts - 

Increase in feed and supplies. 

Total Farm Receipts - 

Farm Expenses 

Hired labor 

Machinery repairs and depreciation 

Building and fence repairs and depreciation 

Feed 

Horseshoeing - 

Breeding fees and seeds 

Threshing and twine (excludes toll) 

Machine work hired 

Taxes 

Water tax 

Cash rent and forest reserve fees 

Miscellaneous expenses 

Value of family labor 

Total Farm Expenses ■■— 

Farm Income (receipts minus expenses) 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 per cent) 

Labor Income 



$5,235 

442 

762 

591 

21 

96 

254 

424 

237 

32 

$8,094 



$ 10 
115 

142 

74 

183 

248 
298 
151 
15 
212 
346 
233 
2 

$2,029 



$ 52 

49 

94 

42 

3 

26 

12 

9 

49 

22 

8 

114 

116 

$ 596 

1,433 
648 



785 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 115 

Table XIX. — Business Factors of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery- 
County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 

Average of 10 Average of all 

better-paying farms 39 farms 

Diversity of Farming 

Number of sources of income 7 6 

Number of crops grown 6 6 

Number of sources income over 10 per cent 

gross receipts 2 2 

Sources of income over 10 per cent gross 
receipts: 

Cattle $ 298 % 243 

Other livestock (hogs, poultry, and bees).... 558 218 

Size of Farm Business 

Total farm capital $ 8,094 $ 6,993 

Farm area (acres). 139 108 

Crop acres 62 53 

Acres alfalfa and other hay 37 28 

Number milk cows : 7 9 

Number other cattle 20 19 

Productive animal units (P.A.U.) 28 29 

Productivity of Ci'ops 

Crop receipts per crop acre $ 10 $ 6 

Crop yields per acre: 

Potatoes 86 bu. 73 bu. 

Spring wheat , 18 bu. 16 bu. 

Oats 39 bu. 32 bu. 

Alfalfa 2 tons 1.8 tons 

Other hay '. 1.7 tons 1.7 tons 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed $ 238 $ 188 

Net livestock receipts per P.A.U 45 24 

Cattle receipts per head 14 13 

Milk receipts per cow 36 14 

Man Ijabor Efficiency 

Miscellaneous receipts per man $ 116 $ 65 

Productive animal units per man 22 22 

Crop acres per man 39 38 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 19 16 

Labor Income $ 785 $ 117 



116 Bulletin No. 177 



Table XX. — Business Statement of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery 
County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 48 
farms farms farms 



Farm Capital 



Real estate ? 3,581 % 4,587 $ 3,868 

Livestock 2,111 2,151 1,984 

Machinery and tools 457 410 382 

Feed and seeds 175 206 208 

Cash 4 17 15 

Total Farm Capital $ 6,328 ^$ 7,371 $ 6,457 

Farm Receipts 

Crops $ 458 $ 269 $ 321 

Livestock 1,040 423 653 

Miscellaneous receipts 371 38 166 

Increase in feed and seeds inventory.... 100 27 41 

Total Farm Receipts % 1,969 - $ 757 % 1,181 

Farm Expenses 

Current farm expenses. ----% 479 $ 692 $ 481 

Depreciation in mach., buildings, fences 64 65 64 

Decrease in inventory of feed and seeds 

Total Farm Expenses $ 543 % 757 % 545 

Farm Income (receipts-expenses) $ 1,426 $ 000 % 636 

Interest on Total Farm Capital at 8 

per cent) 506 590 517 

Labor Income 920 $ -590 $ 119 



Some Tupes of Irrigation Farming in Utah 117 

Table XXI. — Business Factors of Farms of the Ferron Area, 
Emery County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of-all 48 

farms farms farms 

Diversity of Fariuin}» 

Productive animal units per 100 acres 

crops 70 60 60 

Size of Farm Business 

Total farm capital $ 6,328 

Working capital 2,747 

Farm receipts 1,969 

Farm expenses 543 

Crop receipts 458 

Net livestock receipts. ..- 1,040 

Total acres in farm 74 

Crop acres 45 

P. A. U. ...: 31 

Work horses 2.6 

Men (1 year basis) 1.4 

Productivity of Crops 

Crop index (percentage) 120 95 100 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed$ 249 

Net livestock receipts per P. A. U 33 

Man Labor Efficiency 

Productive animal units per man 22 

Crop acres per man 32 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 18 

liabor liie«nne $ 920 



7,371 


$ 6,457 


2,784 


2,590 


757 


1,181 


757 


545 


269 


321 


423 


653 


119 


96 


48 


49 


29 


28 


5 


3.1 


1.9 


1.5 



88 
15 


% 131 
24 


15 
2 6 


18 
3 3 


9 


16 


90 


$ 119 



118 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XXII.- — Business Statement of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery 
County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 34 
farms farms farms 



Farm Capital 

Real estate 

Land $ 3,339 

Buildings 1,248 

Livestock 3,095 

Machinery 526 

Feed and supplies 307 

Total Farm Capital $ 8,515 

Farm Receipts 

Crops 

Potatoes $ 10 

Grain 57 

Hay 20 

Fruit 500 

Other crops 104 

Livestock 

Dairy products 81 

Poultry and egg sales 156 

Cattle sales 456 

Horse sales 35 

Sheep sales 21 

Swine sales 105 

Other receipts 445 

Increase in livestock inventory 719 

Increase in machinery inventory 39 

Increase in feed and supplies 154 

Total Farm Receipts $ 2,902 

Farm Expenses 

Blacksmith and machine work $ 46 

Hired labor 60 

Mach., bldg., and fence material 90 

Feed and seeds 40 

Fees, rents and taxes 147 

Other expense 37 

Livestock purchased 294 

Decrease in livestock inventory — 

Decrease in machinery inventory — 

Decrease in land and buildings 56 

Value of family labor 169 

Total Farm Expenses $ 939 

Farm Income (Receipts-expenses) % 1,963 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 

per cent) 681 

Labor Income $ 1,282 



$ 3,660 

1,226 

1,958 

318 

229 

$ 7,391 



643 



% 2,866 

1,163 

2,075 

397 

268 

$ 6,769 



$ 13 


$ 13 


28 


95 


6 


11 


17 


166 


12 


66 


42 


63 


56 


82 


106 


221 


139 


91 


— 


7 


66 


82 


44 


206 


— 


253 


— 


13 


114 


175 



$ 1,544 



$ 


38 


$ 


51 




1 




28 




13 




64 




23 




24 




87 




101 




12 




26 




26 




153 




57 




— 




15 




— 




51 




39 




76 




104 


? 


399 


% 


590 


% 


244 


% 


954 




591 




542 


$ 


-347 


% 


412 



So7ne Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 119 

Table XXIII. — Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of 

the Hinckley Area, Millard County, Utah, 1914, 

Showing Type of Farming 



No. Value 



Farm Capital 

Total acres in farm 163 $ 9,175 

Milk cows 6 372 

Other cattle 12 427 

Horses and colts 6 632 

Sheep 2 11 

Hogs 3 112 

Poultry 43 22 

Machinery 660 

Feed and supplies 268 

Cash - 149 



Total Farm Capital $11,828 

Farm Receipts 

Crops 

Potatoes $ 5 

Grain 6 3 

Hay 581 

Fruit and vegetables 2 

Alfalfa seed 1,019 

Livestock 

Dairy products 151 

Cattle -.- 329 

Horses - 88 

Sheep and wool ' 3 

Hogs 154 

Poultry and eggs 43 

Miscellaneous receipts 273 

Increase in feed and supplies l"?"? 



Total Farm Receipts $ 2,838 

Farm Expenses 

Hired labor $ 157 

Machinery repairs and depreciation 12 

Building and fence repairs and depreciation 34 

Feed 36 

Horseshoeing and veterinary fees 2 

Breeding fees and seeds - 26 

Threshing and twine (excludes toll) 32 

Machine work hired S 

Taxes ^'^ 

Water tax 10 

Miscellaneous expenses 25 

Value of family labor 83 

Total Farm Expenses ? 489 

Farm Income (receipts minus expenses) $ 2,349 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 per cent) 946 

Labor Income $ 1,403 



120 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XXIV. — Business P^'actors of Farms of Hinckley Area, 
Millard County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 bet- Average of all 
paying farms. 59 farms 



5.2 
4 



340 
244 
186 



9,650 



Diversity of Fanning 

Number of sources of income 6.3 

Number of crops grown 4.3 

Number sources income over 10 per cent gross 

receipts 3 

Sources of income over 10 per cent gross 
receipts: 

Alfalfa seed $ 1,019 % 

Hay , 531 

Cattle 32 9 

Size of Farm Business 

Total farm capital $11,828 $ 

Total acres in farm 163 

Crop acres 78 

.Veres alfalfa 56 

Bushels alfalfa seed raised 138 

Number of milk cows kept 6 

Number of work horses 3.8 

Productive animal units 18 

Productivity of Crops 

Crop receipts per crop acre... $ 21 | 

Receipts from alfalfa seed per acre 44 

Crop yields per acre: 

Potatoes 55 bu. 

Spring wheat 10 bu. 

Fall wheat 11 bu. 

Oats J 20 bu. 

Rye — 

Alfalfa 2.2 tons 

Alfalfa chaff 0.7 tons 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed $ 161 $ 

Net livestock receipts per P. A. U.... 43 

Cattle receipts per head.... 28 

Milk receipts per cow 17 

'' Man Labor Efficiency 

Productive animal units per man 14 

Crop acres per man 61 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 20 

Labor Income $ 1,403 $ 



153 




52 




35 




49 




5 




3.5 




13 




13 




36 




49 


bu. 


6 


bu. 


23 


bu. 


16 


bu. 


13 


bu. 


2.2 tons 


0.8 tons 


130 




40 




26 




24 




11 




45 




15 




323 





So77ie Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 121 

Table XXV. — Business Statement of Farms of Hinckley Area, 
Millard County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 

Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 

better-paying least-profitable of all 60 

farms farms farms 

Farm Capital 

Ileal estate $ 7,550 $ 9,005 ? 7,262 

Livestock 1,645 1,178 1,392 

Machinery and tools 521 630 452 

Feed and seeds 280 202 184 

Cash 94 105 65 

Total Farm Capital $10,090 $11,120 $ 9,355 

Farm Receipts 

Crops $ 1,491 $ 279 $ 588 

Livestock 713 205 458 

Miscellaneous receipts 280 249 183 

Increase in feed and seeds inventory 62 58 

Total Farm Receipts $ 2,546 $ 733 | 1,287 

Farm Expenses 

Current farm expenses $ 451 $ 490 $ 357 

Depreciation in mach., bldgs., fences.... 80 118 78 

Decrease in inventory of feeds and seeds * 9 

Total Farm Expenses $ 531 $ 617 $ 435 

Farm income (receipts-expenses) $ 2,015 $ 116 $ 852 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 

per cent) 807 890 748 

Labor Income •? 1,208 $ -774 $ 104 



122 Bulletin No. 177 



Table XXVI. — Business Factors of Farms of the Hinckley Area, 
Millard County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 60 
farms farms farms 

Diversity of Farming 

Productive animal units per 100 acres 

crops - - - 39 22 22 

Size of Farm Business 

Total farm capital $10,090 $11,120 $ 9,355 

Working capital 2,540 2,115 2,092 

Total acres In farm 114 209 155 

Crop acrees 58 49 51 

Productive animal units (P. A. U.) 23 11 16 

Productivity of Crops 

Crop index (percentage) 109 88 100 

Productivity of Livestock 

Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed..$ 119 

Net livestock receipts per P. A. U 31 

Feed fed per livestock unit 23 

Man Labor Efficiency 

Productive animal units per man 18 

Crop acres per man 45 

Horse Labor Efficiency 

Crop acres per work horse 16 

Labor Income $ 1,208 



48 
19 
30 


$ 97 
29 
24 


7 
33 


12 
40 


14 


15 


■774 


$ 104 



Sovie Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



123 



Table XXVII. — Business Statement of Farms of Hinckley Area, 
Millard County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 39 
farms farms farms 



Farm Capital 

Real estate 

Land $ 5.0 33 

Buildings , 754 

Livestock 1,491 

Machinery 552 

Feed and supplies 282 

Total Farm Capital $ 8,112 

Farm Receipts 

Crops 

Potatoes $ 

Grain 

Hay 

Sugar-beets 

Other crops (alfalfa seed) 

Livestock 

Dairy products 

Poultry and egg sales 

Cattle sales 

Horse sales 

Sheep sales 

Swine sales 

Other receipts 

Increase in livestock inventory 

Increase in machinery inventory.... 
Increase in feed and supplies 

Total Farm Receipts '. $ 3,071 

Farm Expenses 

Blacksmith and machine work $ 115 

Hired labor 72 

Mach., bldg., and fence material 115 

Feed and seeds 24 

Fees, rents, and taxes Ill 

Other expenses 43 

Livestock purchased 146 

Decrease in livestock inventory — 

Decrease in land and buildings 15 

Value of family labor 79 

Total Farm Expenses $ 720 

Farm Income (receipts-expenses) $ 2,351 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 

per cent) 649 

Labor Income $ 1,702 



$ 6,665 


$ 5,171 


1,571 


938 


1,023 


1,246 


383 


408 


184 


220 



% 9,826 



956 



$ 7,983 



5 17 


$ — 


$ 2 


242 


154 


146 


551 


55 


222 

9 

307 


777 


87 


124 


87 


112 


82 


25 


60 


223 


101 


167 


32 


29 


59 


12 


— 


p 


213 


72 


96 


423 


273 


235 


156 


— 


22 


51 


51 


28 


168 


22 


112 



$ 1,582 



% 


58 


$ 


67 




63 




58 




86 




73 




90 




45 




81 




85 




26 




30 




60 




138 




109 




— 




24 




16 




81 


1 


6 3 


$ 


678 


575 


$ 


278 


$ 


1.007 




786 




639 


$ 


-508 


? 


368 



124 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XXVIII. — Business Statement of Farms of Pleasant Grove 
Area, Utah County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming 



Average of 10 Average of 10 Average 
better-paying least-profitable of all 57 
farms farms farms 



$ 3,642 


$ 5,019 


1,030 


1,235 


536 


892 


182 


350 


287 


296 



% 5,677 



716 



$ 7,792 



Farm Capital 

Real estate 

Land $ 8,0 60 

Buildings 1,195 

Livestock 1,526 

Machinery , 613 

Feed and supplies 358 

Total Farm Capital $11,752 

Farm Receipts 
Crops 

Potatoes - $ 365 

Grain 237 

Hay 51 

Sugar-beets 352 

Fruit :.. 98 

Other crops 25 

Livestock 

Dairy products 361 

Poultry and egg sales. - 75 

Cattle sales - 627 

Horse sales — 

Sheep sales 1 

Swine sales — 330 

Other receipts 244 

Increase in livestock inventory 211 

Increase in machinery inventory 28 

Increase in feed and supplies 17 6 

Increase in land and buildings 36 

Total Farm Receipts $ 3,217 

Farm Expenses 

Blacksmith and machine work ...$ 54 

Hired labor 130 

iVlach., bldg., and fence material 125 

Feed and seeds 141 

Fees, rents, and taxes 154 

Other expenses 31 

Livestock purchased 422 

Decrease in livestock inventory — 

Value of family labor 107 

Total Farm Expenses $ 1,164 

Farm Income (Receipts-expenses) $ 2,053 

Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 

per cent) 940 

Labor Income $ 1,113 



% 17 


$ 133 


91 


141 


— 


41 


96 


298 


185 


126 


11 


18 


6 


170 


20 


57 


47 


186 


40 


36 


1 


3 


31 


82 


71 


178 


— 


56 


50 


24 


30 


87 


20 


13 



$ 1,6^ 



% 


34 


$ 


38 




57 




77 




84 




87 




27 




58 




111 . 




128 




66 




28 




20 




111 




23 




— 




70 


? 


81 


% 


492 


608 


% 


224 


$ 


1,041 




454 




623 


% 


-230 


? 


418 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



125 



t- O r-l 



rH 


o 










T— 1 


OJ 


O 


r^H 


00 

oo 


o 


, 


U 


c 




o 


>. 


u 






,£: 






xr. 


ri 


<i) 


o 




% 


^ 


: 



5a 

Q o 






.i3u5 



2 St; o 



d*- aa 

I" ^ r- 

M ^ 2 = 



o ^ o = 



126 



Bulletin No. 177 



o o 



u o 
rt ft 
^3 



d o 

Pi 



o o 



CO ■<*< 00 •»tl 

o 00 05 eg 

00 Oi •* CO 



O O CD -.^ 
00 Tt< •* o 
CO 05 lO i-l 



a ^ 03 , 



• ; ; 


0) lo c- 


Tf O O O O CO o 
CO lO o O lO 00 o 




CCS 
a; (B (D 
_> > > 

"bh "5 'S 


o 

2 


00 00 00 U5 1^0 iH CO 
1— 1 CO Tjt 00 <?5 c- t^ 


oo 

S 


o o o 






o 

;5 




(M C<1 LO 


(M O 'X> O <35 O ■* 

CO CO tH CSI C-l r-< 


; CO ; 



cqcOi-HLO -rHcqc-rt cocoas 

i-ltOlOC3 T-ICO^Ci oococs 

OOOCOCO QO o:i la, r-t ,-|lO 



L010a5CgCO-^l>-lO'^(>5 
l:^C5C^C^010100i-l<MrH 

r-H CO 1-1 r-i eg 



00 LO lo eg 



ooQOcoi-it^cococrgcgo 

OCMt-COOTHOOjH-^rH 
C<l ■*! i-H CO iH 



^1 

O CL, M fc 



Ti o3 -H ^ 



O) a; 

r- CD 



n ^ CD 



5 


"cS 


o 


2 


OS 


en 


.S 


"^ ^ 2 


CJ3 


<JH 


^ 


CO 


O 


ft 


<i1 CIh O 



Some Tijpes of Irrigation Farming in Utah 127 

Table XXXI. — Tenure of Farms in Utah, by Counties, 1880 (i) 



Area 


Number 

of 
Farms 


Average 

Size 
(Acres) 


Farms 
Owned 


Farms 


Rented for 




Cash 


Share 


The State 


9,452 


69 


9,019 


60 


373 









County 

Beaver 211 60 

Boxelder 533 88 

Cache 998 85 

Davis 560 101 

Emery 84 127 

Iron 217 55 

Juab 185 63 

Kane 214 32 

Millard 235 62 

Morgan 182 61 

Piute 134 118 

Rich 153 135 

Salt Lake 961 53 

San Juan 31 43 

Sanpete 1,015 49 

Sevier 429 53 

Summit 298 96 

Tooele 304 75 

Uinta .., 7 21 

Utah 1,321 68 

Wasatch 339 59 

Washington .... 193 38 

Weber 848 68 

(1)1880 U. S. Census. 



. 486 


8 


39 


943 


22 


33 


531 


1 


28 


81 




3 


202 


2 


13 


185 






200 




14 


224 




11 


174 




8 


130 




4 


147 


1 


5 


910 


10 


41 


31 






999 


5 


11 


402 




27 


287 


2 


9 


275 


1 


28 


7 






1,271 


4 


46 


330 


1 


8 


190 




3 


810 


3 


35 



128 Bnlletin No. 177 

Table XXXII. — Tenure of Farms in Utah, by Counties, 1890 (i) 



be 


-73 M 


1-* -M 


OJ 


Pel 


centag 






7i <s 


a a 


M G 




'^ 












Q) 




< 


op:: 


^Pi 


o 






oB 









The State | 10,517| 126| 9,974| 121| 422| 94. 8| 1.15| 4.01 



Counties 

Beaver ... 
Boxelder 
Cache .... 

Davis 

Emery ... 



Garfield 
Grand .. 

Iron 

Juab .... 
Kane .... 



Millard .... 
Morgan ... 

Piute 

Rich 

Salt Lake. 

San Juan. 
Sanpete ... 

Sevier 

Summit ... 
Tooele 



Uinta 

Utah 

Wasatch 

Washington 
Weber 



I I I 

I 2101 771 

478| 900l 

1,065| 94| 

6821 120| 

266 1111 



93 

56 

198 

97 

120 

360 
238 
143 
193 
1,366 

38 

1,191 

312 

362 

301 

f 

186] 

1,198| 

289| 

187| 
942| 

I 



77| 

108| 

291 

157i 
661 

135 

85 

126 

491 

54 

108 
80 
88 
97 

137 

106 

57 
68 
26 
63 



197 
463 
979 
634 
256 

91 
52 

193 
93 

112 

302 
211 
137 

188 
1,254 

38 

1,163 

297 

345 

281 

186 
1,159 

277 
181 
885 



2| 
45| 



121 
ll| 
55| 



93.81| 
96.86| 
91.93| 
92.961 
96.24] 

97.851 
92.86} 
97.47| 
95.881 
93.33] 

I 
98.69] 
88.66] 
95.80] 
97.41] 
91.80| 

I 
100. OOj 
97.65] 
95.19] 
95.31] 
93.36] 



.._.]100.00] 
32] 96.75] 
16] 95.85] 
6] 96.79| 
50] 93.95] 



.48 

.84 

2.91 

1.32 

.75 



1.78 



1.03 



1.04 
3.29 



.34 



.55 



.74 



5.71 
2.30 
5.16 
5.72 
3.01 

2.15 
5.36 
2.53 
3.09 
6.67 

1.31 
11.34 
4.20 
1.55 
4.91 



2.01 
4.81 
4.14 
4.98 



2.76 
4.15 
3.21 
5.31 



(1)1890 U. S. Census 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 129 

Table XXXIII. — Tenure of Farms in Utah by Counties, 1900 (i) 



Area 





rj M 




■V 






bjo 


S 3 


CO 


^Z 


^ 


^1 






u <x> 

Si 




c 


< 


5^ 


o 


o 



The State | 19,387| 212. 4| 15,177| 2,0511 1351 3111 5061 1,207 



< "ounties 
Beaver ... 
Boxelder 
Cache .... 
Carbon .. 
Davis 



Emery .. 
Garfield 
Grand .. 

Iron 

Juab .... 



Kane ... 
Millard 
Morgan 
Piute ... 
Rich .... 



Rait Lake. 
San Juan. 

Sanpete .. 

Sevier 

Summit .. 



Tooele 

Uinta 

Utah 

Wasatch 

Washington 



Wayne 
Weber 



I 213| 112.4 

I 676| 159.8 

I 2991 463.6 

I 189| 145.8 

I 2761 582.8 



301 


97.1] 


216| 


16 


....| 




2 


22 


1,017 


561.11 


•813| 


115 


6| 


21 


15 


47 


1,795 


176.41 


1,446| 


236 


6| 


16 


15 


76 


144 


194. 3| 


112| 


10 


4| 


5 


7 


6 


938 


240. 9| 


6111 


217 


11 


16 


43 


40 


458 


118.3 


400 


12 


....1 


3 


6 


37 


237 


121.5 


228| 


3 


2| 






4 


121 


129.61 


100! 


5 


....| 


5 


2 


9 


235 


100. 3| 


197| 


2 


61 


13 


2 


15 


356 


222.81 


249| 


62 


3| 


3 


4 


35 



2,208 1 
851 

1,618| 
946| 
608| 



125.0 
221.7 
116. 6| 
79.51 
476.41 



1881 
575J 
217| 
159| 
230| 

1,561| 
66i 

1,313| 
810 i 
5261 



1 487| 238.2] 4221 

I 559| 608.8] 4661 

I 2,760| 81.1] 2,0411 

1 492| 190.0] 386] 

1 477! 45.9] 355] 



2711 108.3] 
1,4791 126.21 



215! 
1,098 



17] 

52] 

38| 

6] 

3 

250 
6 

115| 

64| 



12] 

29] 

4161 

50] 



151 

181 



2| 
12] 
301 



7| 
121 

li 
211 



101 

5] 
4| 

I 



71 
30| 
171 
191 

I 
161 

71 

22| 

4| 

41 



5] 
111 

8| 
12] 

ol 

41 
56] 

7| 
21 



41] 152] 187 



144 
42 
32 

26 
41 
19.^ 
45 
12 



2| 61 31 
13] 1051 73 

I I 



(1)1910 U. S. Census. 



130 



Bulletin No. 177 



Table XXXIV. 



-Tenure of Farms in Utah, by Counties, by 
Percentages, 1900 (ij 







0) 






Percen 


tages 










w 


§2 


S 


^-J 


'^ fl 


Area 




fin 

< 


a a 
5^ 


U CO 

O 


IS 

o 


1 




^1 


The State 


19,387 


212.4 


78.3 


10.6 


0.7 


1.6 


2.6 


6.2 


Counties 




















301 
1,017 


97.1 
561.1 


86.7 
79.9 


5.3 
11.3 


076 


2:1- 


0.7 
1.5 


7.3 


Boxelder 


4.6 


Cache 


1,795 


176.4 


80.6 


13.2 


0.3 


0.9 


0.8 


4.2 


Carbon 


144 


194.3 


77.8 


6.9 


2.8 


3.5 


4.8 


4.2 


Davis 


938 


240.9 


65.1 


23.1 


1.2 


1.7 


4.6 


4.3 


Emery 


458 
237 


118.3 
121.5 


87.3 
96.2 


2.6 
1.3 


0.8 


0.7 


1.3 


8.1 


Garfield 


1.7 


Cirand 


121 
235 


129.6 
100.3 


82.7 
83.8 


4.1 
0.9 


2:6 


4.1 

5.5 


1.7 
0.8 


2.4 


Iron 


6.4 


Juab 


356 


222.8 


70.0 


17.4 


0.9 


0.8 


1.1 


9.8 


Kane 


213 


112.4 


88.2 


8.0 


.... 


1.9 




1.9 


Millard 


676 


159.8 


85.1 


7.7 


0.7 


1.0 


1.5 


4.0 


Morgan 


299 


463.6 


72.6 


12.7 


1.0 


4.0 


2.3 


7.4 


Piute 


189 


145.8 


84.1 


3.2 


0.5 


0.5 


2.7 


9.0 


Rich 


276 


582.8 


83.3 


1.1 




7.6 


1.5 


6.5 


Salt Lake 


2,208 


125.0 


70.7 


11.3 


0.8 


1.8 


6.9 


8.5 


San Juan 


85 


221.7 


77.6 


7.1 


1.2 


8.2 


5.9 


.... 


Sanpete 


1,618 


116.6 


81.1 


7.1 


0.3 


1.9 


0.7 


8.9 


Sevier 


946 


79.5 


85.6 


6.8 


0.5 


1.8 


0.9 


4.4 


Summit 


608 


476.4 


86.5 


3.1 




3.1 


2.0 


5.3 


Tooele 


487 


238.2 


86.7 


2.5 


0.4 


3.3 


1.8 


5.3 


Uinta 


559 


608.8 


83.4 


5.2 


2.1 


1.3 


0.7 


7.3 


Utah 


2,760 


81.1 


73.9 


15.1 


1.1 


0.8 


2.0 


7.1 


Wasatch 


492 


1 190.0 


78.5 


10.2 




0.8 


1.4 


9.1 


Washington .. 


477 


1 45.9 


74.4 


20.8 


1.1 


0.8 


0.4 


2.5 


Wayne 


271 


1 108.3 


79.3 


5.5 


0.8 


0.7 


2.2 


11.5 


Weber 


1,479 


1 126.2 


74.3 


12.2 


0.6 


0.9 


7.1 


4.9 



(1)1910 U. S. Census 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



131 



Table XXXV. — Tenure of Farms in Utah by Counties, 1910 (i) 



o 


01 


■^2 


CQ 


a: 


M 






■bb 


CS Q) 




$^^ 


sP 


^i 


o s 




< 


s >. 


b- 


"z 




o^ 





m^^ 



State |21,676|156.7|19,762| 1,720| 837] 97| 



490 


296| 


3 


1 


35 


20| 


35 


34| 


2 


9 


24 


45 


5 


5 


6 


35] 


3 


1| 


1 


is! 




31 




1 


11 


5 


6 


1 


1 


21 


10 


.... 


119 


22 


.... 


2 


10 


3 


14 


131 


13 


4| 


19 


1 
11 


13 


191 


45 


24| 


15 


111 


3 


6| 


1 


1 

2! 


106 
1 


13! 

1 



194 



Counties 

Beaver .. 
Boxelder 
Cache .... 
Carbon .. 
Davis 



jumery .. 
Garfield 
Grand .. 

Iron 

Juab 



Kane ... 
Millard 
Morgan 
IMute .. 
Rich .... 



Salt Lake. 
San Juan. 
Sanpete ... 

Sevier 

Summit ... 



Tooele 

Uinta 

Utah 

Wasatch .... 
Washington 



Wayne 
Weber 



3191144.2 
1,527|244.7 
1,907|154.3 

171|331.3 
1,302; 97.7 

I 
6661145.2 
4091146.6 
1731361.0 
3731236.0 
507214.1 

I 

1661149.2 

7361226.4 

2421395.2 

198'130.7 

2191682.7 

I 

2,1801 77.6 

157|310.8 

1,708|153.3 

1.059|115.6 

4471584.0 

I 
320|276.0 
6751121.6 
2,873| 81.7 
9641159.8 
5981 84.1 

I 
246|128.5 
1,5351 96.6 
I 



285| 
1,382| 
l,756i 

155| 
1,205| 

625t 
3531 
156! 
3331 
4951 

I 
164| 
670' 
2131 
I74I 
198| 

1,8761 
151| 

1,628! 
987| 
407| 

2891 
601| 
2,641 
8901 
583| 

233 
1,312 



321 
I25I 
139j 

151 



2 
51 
24 
24 

17| 

2771 

31 

781 

671 

261 

26 

72 

205 

72 
14! 

I 

203I 



28 
67 
59 

.2! 
211 



27 
13 

1 
21 

5 

1 
31! 

4! 

201 

71 

13o| 

1| 

6OI 

37! 

91 

I2I 

38! 

1181 

35| 

5 

71 
781 



I J 



41 

141 

II 



20 



(1)1910 U. S. Census. 



132 Bulletin No. 177 



Table XXXVI. — Percentage of all Farms Operated by Owners, 
Utah, 1889 and 1909(i) 



1909 1889 

State 91.2 94.8 

98.8 93.33 

97.6 95.88 
97.5 96.79 

96.2 100.00 

95.3 97.65 

94.7 

93.8 96.24 

93.2 95.19 

92.5 92.96 

92.3 95.85 

92.1 91.93 

91.9 96.75 
91.1 95.31 
91.0 98.69 

90.7 92.86 

90.6 

90.5 96.86 

90.4 97.41 
90.3 93.36 
89.3 97.47 

89.3 93.81 

89.0 100.00 

88.0 88.66 
87.9 95.80 
86.3 97.85 

86.1 91.80 

85.5 93.95 





County 


1. 


Kane 


2. 


Juab 


3. 


Washington 


4. 


San Juan 


5. 


Sanpete 


6. 


Wayne 


7. 


Emery 


8. 


Sevier 


9. 


Davis 


10. 


Wasatch 


11. 


Cache 


12. 


Utah 


13. 


Summit 


14. 


Millard 


15. 


Grand 


16. 


Carbon 


17. 


Boxelder 


18. 


Rich 


19. 


Tooele 


20. 


Iron 


21. 


Beaver 


22. 


Uinta 


23. 


Morgan 


24. 


Piute 


25. 


Garfield 


26. 


Salt Lake 


27. 


Weber 



(i)U. S. Census Reports. 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 



133 




c3 

5 '51b 7 M 
bjo a^ aj J 



^2 

a 








V 


V 


V 


a 


tc 



'J3 
0) QJ 






^ - - a; 
c3 5 a> b 



t>£ 5^ U) c u.^ 
oj X 0) iJ a,' ^ 



^ ?= ^ 









t, .^ .^ t, t, (-, fc- 

, GiK, > a a a a 



iC Cl 05 O 00 



5 -S S 

OJ i ^ 

C be M) c 03 
■^ .6 .S S > 
iS -^ ^ 3 rt 
a « o ^ -^ 

o o o o » 
U U C O ^ 



o i; 






"S.S 



^sSg 



c "be .5 .2 

CTJ be o o 

» .-I a 

(u 0) c B 
o o c o 

o o c o 
a a ^ ^ 

■n in t- 1- 

rt rt o O 



bJD bf.S 

« aj b£ 

be be 

c c be 

l|i 

aS ^ 



^:i 

C > o m 

|!5aii 

to 03 rt 

C C a; 03 
CS rt a-r- - 

01 <I) > o 

.2 2 £ g o 
fc 'fc. H m H 






.c -a 

a 

S-8 



2 a 
2 o 

•sa 



<j o 



cd p. 



OS 



134 



Bulletin No. 177 



Comparison of the average crop yields in Utah with the average 
yields of Iowa and the United States. Yields used are for the ten years 
1905-14 as given in the 1914 yearbook of the United States Department 
of Agriculture. 

Table XXXVIII. — Average Yields of Seven Important Utah Crops 



Crop 


Ten-year Average Acre-yields 

United 
Utah States Iowa 


Percentage 
of average 
U. S. yields 


Percentage 
of average 
Iowa yields 


Hay ...__ 

Potatoes 

Corn 


2.81 tons 1.40 tons 
152 bu. 96.5 bu. 
31.9 bu. 26.6 bu. 
22.8 bu. 15.7 bu. 

27.3 bu. 13.3 bu. 

45.4 bu. 29.6 bu. 
41.2 bu. 25.1 bu. 


1.39 tons 
82 bu. 
34.9 bu. 
21.2 bu. 
15.4 bu. 
31.9 bu. 
26.2 bu. 


201 
158 
120 
145 
210 
153 
164 


202 

185 

91 


Winter wheat 
Spring wheat 
Oats 


108 
177 
142 


Barley 


157 


Total 






1,151 


1,062 


Average 




■ 164 

64 


152 
52 












Table XXXIX. — Percentage Yield, or Crop Index, Based on 
U. S. Yields 


Average 


Crop 


Acres Grown Comparative 
in Utah, 1909 Yield Per Acre 


Acres Multiplied by 
the Percentage Yield 


Hay _ 

Potatoes 

Corn 

Winter wheat. 
Spring wheat.. 

Oats 

Barley 


405,394 

14,210 

7,267 

119,948 

58,442 

80,816 

26,752 


201 
158 
120 
145 
210 
153 
164 


81,484,194 

2,245,180 

872,040 

17,392,460 

12,272,820 

12,364,848 

4,389,328 


Total...... 

Percent 


712,829 

age yield, or crop index . 


131,02 

131,020,870 
712,829 


20,870 









Table XL. — Percentage Yield, or Crop Index, Based on Aver; 
Iowa Yields 



Acres Grown Comparative 

Crop in Utah, 1909 Yield Per Acre 

Hay 405,394 202 

Potatoes 14,210 185 

Corn .-. 7,267 91 

Winter wheat........: 119,948 108 

Spring wheat 58,442 177 

Oats -. 80,816 142 

Barley 26,752 157 

Total 712,829 

Percentage yield, or crop index -^ 



Acres Multiplied by 
the Percentage Yield 



81,889,588 

2,628,850 

661,297 

12,954,384 

10,344,234 

11,475,872 

4,200,064 



124,154,289 
124,154,289 



174 



Sone Types of Irrigatio7i Farming in UtaJi 131 



INDEX 



ILLUSTRATIONS 

Figure Title Page 

1. Location of the 8 Areas Investigated, Utah 5 

2. Average Annual Precipitation in Utah 21 

3. Average Annual Precipitation in inches in areas investigated, Utah.. 21 

4. Average Precipitation in Crop Growing Season, Utah 21 

5. Mean Annual Temperature, Utah 21 

6. Average Days in Crop-growing Season, Utah 22 

7. Date of Average Last Killing Frost in Spring, Utah 22 

8. Date of Average First Killing Frost in Autumn, Utah 22 

9. Latest Date of Killing Frost in Spring, Utah '. 22 

10. Earliest Date of Killing Frost in Autumn, Utah 23 

11. Highest Temperatures Recorded, Utah.. 23 

12. Lowest Temperatures Recorded, Utah 23 

13. Mountains, Valleys, Lakes and Streams, Utah ..23 

14. Extent of Old Lake Bonneville in Utah, where. Soils of the Great 

Interior Basin Originated 25 

J 5. Three General Soil Provinces in Utah 25 

16. Soil Surveys in Utah. 25 

17. National Forests of Intermountain Region 26 

18. Distribution of Population, by Counties. Utah 27 

19. Density of Population, by Counties, Utah 27 

20. Railroads, Auto Roads, and National Forests, Utah 38 

21. Three Canals that Supply Irrigation Water for Hyde Park Farms, 

Cache County, Utah 47 



136 Bulletin No. 177 

TABLES IN TEXT 
Table Title Page 

I. Number of Farm Records Studied Bach Year by Counties, 

Utah 6 

II. Number of Farm Records by Length of Record for Each 

County, Utah 6 

III. Tenure and Use of Farm Land, 32 Farms, Hyde'^ Park, Cache 

County, Utah, 1914, 1915, and 1916 7 

IV. Crop Yields. on Hyde Park Farm, 1914, 1915, and 1916 8 

V. Yield, Price, and Acre-value of Sugar-beets and Potatoes, 

1914, 1915, and 1916, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah. .11 
VI. Average Number of Units of Livestock on Farms, Hyde Park, 

Cache County, Utah, 1914 and 1915. 13 

VII. Farm Receipts and Expenses, Average of 52 Farms, Hyde 

Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 16 

VIII. Average Value of Farm Machinery, Hyde Park Farms, 

Cache County, Utah, 1914, 1915, and 1916 19 

IX. Soil Types of Farms Reporting, 52 Hyde Park Farms. 

Cache County, Utah 24 

X. Value of all Domestic Animals on Farms and Ranges, by 

Counties, Utah, April 15, 1910 27 

XI. Size of Farm Family, Acres Sugar-beets Raised, and Cows 

Milked, Hyde Park. Cache County, Utah, 1914 28 

XII. Size of Farm Family, Labor Income, Value of Unpaid Family 
Labor, Farm Income, and Family Income, Hyde Park, 
Cache County, Utah, 1914.... .30 

XIII. Value of Farm Dwellings, 50 F,arms, Hyde Park, Cache 

County, Utah, 1914 31 

XIV. Relation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, Hyde 

Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 31 

XV. Relataion of Value of P'arm Home and Labor Income, Hyde 

Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914. 31 

XVI. Relation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, Hyde 

Park, Cache County. Utah, 1914 ..31 

XVII. Order of Crop Work at Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah 33 

XVIII. Persons 10 Years of Age or Over Engaged in Agriculture 

in Utah, 1910 34 

XIX. Average Cost of Hired Labor on Farms, by Counties, 

Utah, 1910 ^ 35 

XX. Wages of Farm Labor in Utah, 1866-1918 36 

XXI. Ratio of Agricultural Workers to Improved Area of Farms, 

1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910 36 

XXII. Tenure of Farms, Cache County, Utah, 1880, 1890, 1900, 

and 1910 40 

XXIII. Number and Kinds of Tenants, Cache County, Utah, 18 80, 

1890. 1900, and 1910 _ 41 

XXIV. Total Land Area, Land in Farms, and Improved Land in 

Farms, by Counties, Utah, 1909..... 41 

XXV. Percentage of Tenancy, Utah, 1880-1910 .....42 

XXVI. Total Value of Land and Buildings and Value of Land and 
Buildings per Farm and per Acre, 52 Farms. Hyde 

Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 42 

XXVII. Distance from Market and Land Values per Acre in 7 Areas, 

Utah, 1914 43 

XXVIII. Percentage of Land in Farms and Farm Land Improved and 

Land Value per Acre, by Counties, Utah, 1910 44 

XXIX. Relation of Improved Farm Land to Value of all Farm 

Land per Acre, Utah, 1910 44 



Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 137 

Table Title Page 

XXX. Average Values per Acre of Farm Land, Buildings, Ma- 
chinery ,and Livestock, by Counties, Utah, 1910 45 

XXXI. Average Value of Land and Buildings, per Acre, by Coun- 
ties, Utah, Census Years 46 

XXXIL Crops Grown, Period of Irrigation, Number of Irrigations, 
Days between Irrigations, Logan and Richmond Canal, 
1900 50 

XXXIII. Farm Mortgages. Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914....52 

XXXIV. Mortgage Debt of Farms by Counties, Utah, 1910 53 

XXXV. Farm Mortgages, Utah and the United States, 1910 54 

XXXVI. Average Labor Income, 52 Farms, Hyde Park, 1914 55 

XXXVII. The Farmer's Pay for Management and Risk or Responsi- 
bility Taken, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 56 

XXXVIII. Business Statement of the Average of 10 Better-paying 
Farms of the Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 

1914, Showing Type of Farming and Labor Income 57 

XXXIX. Business Statement of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache 

County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 58 

XL. Business Statement of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache 

County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming 59 

XLI. Labor Incomes of 32 Farmers, Hyde Park, Cache County. 

Utah, 1914, 1915, and 1916 60 

XLII. Labor Income of Utah Farmers, 1909 (1910 U. S. Census).... 62 
XLIII. Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 50 Farms, Beaver, 

Beaver County, Utah, 1914 64 

XLIV. Size of Farm Family and Number of Cows Kept, Beaver, 

Beaver County, Utah, 1914 66 

XLV. Size of Family, Acres Sugar-beets Raised, and Cows Milked, 

Monroe, Sevier County, Utah, 1914 69 

XLVI. Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 66 Farms, Mon- 
roe, Sevier County, Utah, 1914 69 

XLVII Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 72 Farms, Sandy, 

Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914 71 

XLVIII. Size of Farm Family, i^cres Sugar-beets Raised and Cows 

Milked. Sandy, Salt Lake County. Utah. 1914 72 

XLIX. Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 38 Farms, Perron, 

Emery County, Utah, 1914 73 

L. Size of Farm Family, Number Milk and Beef Cows Kept, 

Ferron, Emery County, Utah. 1914 74 

LI. Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 26 Farms, Wel- 
lington. Carbon. County. Utah. 1914. ^ 75 

LII. Size of Farm Family and Milk Cows Kept, Wellington, Car- 
bon County. Utah, 1914 76 

LIII. Size of Farm Family and Number of Milk Cows Kept, 

Hinckley, Millard County, Utah, 1914 .'. 77 

LIV. Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 59 Farms, Hinck- 
ley. Millard County. Utah. 1914 77 

LV. Size of Farm Family. Acres Sugar-beets Raised, and Cows 

Milked. Pleasant Grove, Utah County, Utah. 1916 79 

LVI. Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 56 Farms, Pleas- 
ant Grove, Utah County. Utah. 1916 - 80 



138 



Bulletin No. 1'. 



TABLES IN APPENDIX 

Table Title Page 

I. Business Factors of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache Coun- 
ty, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 97 

II. Business Factors of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache 

County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 98 

III. Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the 
Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utah, 1914, Showing 

Type of Farming 99 

IV. Business Factors of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver County, 

Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming. .100 

V. Business Statement of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver Coun- 

■ ty, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming. 101 

VI. Business Factors of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver County, 

Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming .....102 

VII. Business Statement of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver 

County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming 103 

VIII. Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the 
Monroe Area, Sevier County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type 

of Farming ...104 

IX. Business Factors of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier County, 

Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming. ....105 

X. Business Statement of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier 

County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 106 

XI. Business Factors of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier County, 

Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 107 

XII. Business Statement of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier 

County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming. .....108 

XIII. Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Sandy 

Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of 
Farming 109 

XIV. Business Factors of Farms of Sandy Area, Salt Lake 

County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 110 

XV. Business Statement of Farms of Sandy Area, Salt Lake 

County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming Ill 

XVI. Business Factors of Farms of Sandy Area, Salt Lake 

County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 112 

XVII. Business Statement of Farms in Sandy Area, Salt Lake 

County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming 113 

XVIII. Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the 
Ferron Area. Emery County, Utah, 1914, Showing 

Type of Farming 114 

XIX. Business Factors of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery County, 

Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 115 

XX. Business Statement of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery 

County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming 116 

XXI. Business Factors of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery County, 

Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming...., 117 

XXII. Business Statement of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery 

County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming..... US 

XXIII. Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the 
Hinckley Area, Millard County, Utah, 1914, Showing 

Type of Farming... 1 '9 

XXIV. Business Factors of Farms of Hinckley Area, Millard 

County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 120 

XXV. Business Statement of Farms of Hinckley Area, Millard 

County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming. 121 

XXVI. Business Factors of Farms of Hinckley Area, Millard 

County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming.. 122 



Some Types of Irrigatioti Farming in Utah 



139 



Table 

XXVII. 

XXVIII. 

XXIX. 
XXX. 

XXXI. 

XXXII. 
XXXIII. 
XXXIV. 

XXXV. 
XXXVI. 

XXXVII. 

XXXVIII. 

XXXIX. 

XL. 



Title Pag« 

Rnsiuess Statement of Farms of Hinckley Area, Millard 

Countv Utah. 1916. Showing Type of Farming -123 

Business Statement of Farms of Pleasant Grove Area, Utah 

^^ county Utah. 1916. Showing Type of Farming 24 

. „„„ irl^rm Prices in Utah, December 1, 1880-191» izs 

xlXr and ul: ol Farm Land 32 Farms. Hyde Park 
Cache Countv, Utah, 1914. 1915, and 1916 126 

TenuTofFai^sin Utah.'by ■counties 1910... -.^^ 

mientage of all Farms Operated by Owners, Utah. 1889^^^ 

DaS'o^^mCropOperations-inTAVeas-ofUtah 133 

Average Yields of 7 Important Utah Crops -^-134 

pircentaje Yield, or Crop Index. Based on Average U. S.^^^ 

PerSnlage Yield: or "crop "l^dex:'Based"'on Average lowa^^^ 
Yields .— 



140 Bulletin No. 177 



BIOGRAPHICAL, 

Birth and Marriage. — Edgar Bernard Brossard was born on the 
Brossard Stock Ranch, Oxford, Bannock County, Idaho, April 1, 1889. 
Son of Alphonse Aimable and Mary Catherine (Hobson) Brossard. 

Married Laura Parkinson Cowley, daughter of Mathias Foss and 
Luella Smart (Parkinson) Cowley, August 25, 1915. 

School and Collegiate Record. — Attended the grade schools at Ox- 
ford, Idaho; and Ogden and Logan, Utah; and did high school and 
college work at the Utah Agricultural College, 1904-5 and 1906-1911 
inclusive, where he was granted the Batchelor of Science degree in Gen- 
eral Science with a major in Economics, June, 1911. 

September 1916 to June 1917 he was a graduate student in Agricul- 
tural Economics and Farm Management at the University of Minnesota, 
where he was granted the Master of Science degree in June 1917. Sep- 
tember 1917 to June 1918 he did graduate work in Agricultural Eco- 
nomics and Farm Management at Cornell University. From June 1918 
to September 1919 he was again registered in the Graduate School of the 
University of Minnesota, from which school he was granted the degree 
of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) June 1920, with a major in Agricultural 
Economics and a minor in Farm Management. 

Teaching Experience. — He was instructor in mathematics at the Utah 
Agricultural College, 1909-1910. He was State Farm Management Dem- 
onstrator for Utah for two years and three months, September 1, 1914 
to August 31, 1916, and again from June 1, 1917 to August 31, 1917. 
At the University of Minnesota, 1916-17 he was assistant Farm Manage- 
ment Demonstrator and in 1918-19 he was instructor in Farm Manage- 
ment. From September 1, 1919 to date he has been Professor of Farm 
Management at the Utah Agricultural College and in charge of Farm 
Management Investigations at the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station. 

Organizations and P>aternities. — He is a member of the American 
Farm Economic Association, The National Irrigation and Drainage Con- 
gress, The Utah Educational Association, Pi Zeta Pi (a social fraternity), 
Alpha Zeta, (a professional agricultural fraternity), Gamma Sigma Delta 
(an honorary agricultural fraternity) and Phi Kappa Phi (an honorary 
scholastic fraternity). 

Other Activities. — In undergraduate years he took part in college 
activities. He was the first "Four-letter" athlete of the Utah Agricultural 
College, having won four official sweaters in one year, one each for foot- 
ball, basketball, baseball, and track, and one year was captain of the 
football team, and another year manager of basketball. He took part in 
college dramatics and was on the editorial staff of the college paper as 
well as class president of the graduating class 1911. 

His work and studies while not in college, have permitted him to 
travel and become somewhat familiar with the States of the United States 
lying West of the Mississippi River and Minnesota, Illinois and New 
York. He studied thirty-two months in Europe, October 1911 to May 1914, 
and while there visited the large cities and some of the most interesting 
parts of England, France, Germany, Switzerland, Holland, and Belgium. 
Headquarters while in Europe were at Paris, France, where he learned 
to read, write, and speak the French language. 



